UpandIn

He'd be on a team right now if he wanted to. I suspect he believes he's worth more than he actually is. Several teams have talked to him or been interested in him. Maybe he's getting bad advice, maybe he thinks because he's coming off his "best season," last year(per PFF)...or that if he just waits, he'll get an offer more in line with what he thinks he deserves. Wouldn't shock me at all if he got fully healthy, came back and then had a big Rasul Douglas like year. I wouldn't bet on it, but it wouldn't shock me. He played his best when he was playing in the middle of the field, covering TEs and reading the QBs eyes. Maybe a Cover 3 scheme is just a better fit for him(though for some reason that's what we ran primarily in week 1...and it's kinda baffling...not even C3 match 2 or anything, but...basic drops, run a clear out, let Jefferson cross behind the LBers, safeties come up, he bends it up, safeties stay back, he flattens it out and ...it's just what the Packers have done. Anyway, King is clearly good enough to be on this 53 man. He CAN play STs. He has played STs and... Maybe sometime off to just...reset, miss the game, get healthy and then pick a team that needs him will be good for him. He's too...physically gifted to be so bad. But as of now, you have NO idea what you'll get from him. He was one of the best tackling DBs in the league last year. Where the hell did THAT come from? Maybe that 6'2 145 pound stick should play in the box. IDK, you can't always figure these guys out. Some are just missing that mental component. They lose their confidence and they can't get it back. He was benched for Chandon Sullivan last year. A below average #4 CB with a fraction of the ability he has. I'll be on board with signing him...NOW. After week 1 so he's not fully guaranteed a full season. Give him 250K signing, vet minimum and bring him in. We have 19 or 20 games left. We'll get 10-13 from him...most likely. Maybe he does something, maybe he's no different than Jean-Charles. Who knows at this point.

There were largely two plays. One you can put about 90 pct on the DC. The Buccs have 7 seconds to go, we play single hi man. They're NOT throwing the ball over the middle. We play PRESS man. King had a bad back and wasn't running well that game. Give the Buccs credit, they took a shot. But Pettine...man, that was almost Greg Williams level irresponsible. You assume they're trying to get another 8 yards there and kick the FG as they were JUST on the verge of FG range. The other was on a play that was just...bizarre officiating. The Packers get the IDEAL scenario after they decide to kick. TB brings the ball out, AND cover it well, tackle them at the ~16 and do so with like 2:06 left. They complete a pass for 9 yards, we give them a 1st down. 3rd down, we have TWO Time Out's remaining, it's 3rd and 4. They get Tyler Johnson in man coverage with King. King grabs his undershirt. The ball is uncatchable, he's not impeding Johnson and it's not as bad as the hold on Murphy-Bunting that the refs let go at the end of the 1st half that led to the Scotty Miller TD. Oh, and the flag came out about 5 seconds AFTER the play. He clearly had a hold of his shirt...but again, the pick Rodgers threw was WORSE of a hold and was a 10 point swing and like they did all day, they let them play.

Chourio? Pft...dude can't even hit .100 in AA. I've seen all I need to see there. Best trade him this off-season while he's still got SOME value! And Turang 0-5? Ruiz 1 SB? I guess he thinks one 5 SB game and now he can just coast the rest of the way apparently? BTW, look back at the Brewers prospect ranking by Fangraphs just mid 2021...I went a couple years not following our prospects nearly as closely as I did prior and this year. I guess with the Alternate Training Site, all we got was little bits of information. Ashby looks great, whoever's impressed. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/top-42-prospects-milwaukee-brewers/ They were WAY ahead of Quero than I was(and I believe most people were). This does not include last years picks obvious, but the right ups were pretty damn accurate. High on Chourio. Cam Devanney-Zarr's favorite And then Joey Wiemer...maybe the most accurate one yet despite checking in at #26. Welp...looks like his approach has toned down and that 70 power and 80 arm had some validity to it. Not sure the speed of 50 isn't cheating him, but...still, they really nailed him. This system would look THAT much better if not for that ill-fated Daniel Norris trade, but...as Forrest would say, "it happens." Also...if Ethan Small was touching 96, I REALLY hope he gets back there. If he could just have confidence in his stuff and not nibble until he's 3-1 and then has to either give in or put a man on base and instead challenge a guy with a 94MPH fastball in the zone or get that big curve over for a strike earlier on, it should help him develop into the #3-4 pitcher he has the potential to develop into. We should also keep in mind, he's yet to throw 200 professional innings yet in his career, so a little patience here is in order. My MAIN thought though is...MAN, what an ugly system this looked like just a year ago. Loved Ashby, always loved Turang. Mitchell...I'm still a bit split on(nothing to do with his limited MLB at bats). What could this look like in another year? Could Avina be tearing it up in AA? Devanney hitting .300/.375/.475 in AAA, maybe Misiorowski rolling up to AAA, Gasser dominating and earning a call up and another half a dozen young guys like Barrios, Stiven Cruz, Medina, Para, who knows. But this system should be top ~10-14 going into next year with a lot more talent coming down the pipeline.

I mean...it's so much worse than just the 1.1M for the speaking fees, the volleyball funding...this is even more blatantly corrupt. https://mississippitoday.org/2022/04/04/phil-bryant-brett-favre-welfare-scandal-payout/

I'd say with an impressive farm system on the verge of churning out position prospects, National TV money increasing, local TV money increasing, signing one of the top pitchers in the game would be "winning." But maybe it wouldn't be. I do know what "losing," looks like...and it's players openly upset with management and questioning their commitment to winning right now. THAT is...very much losing.

-Don't think he'll get anything close to that. Pitchers are getting shorter contracts with higher AAV. -He's part of an exceptionally deep FA class... -He WASN'T a FA. I feel like this is a pretty big point otherwise you could point to virtually ANY player who signs during their first 6 years and say they were insulted by the offer they accpeted. -How much was Walker Buehler, a young pitcher who's body of work was at least as good as Burnes, what would he have commanded? He's about 3 months older than Burnes. Was he also getting 400M over 10 years? -But here are the two MAIN points that I CONTINUE to make. A-He is NOT a Free Agent. Nobody is looking at what a pitcher MIGHT get 3 years in the future and giving a pitcher THAT deal. I could make a list of 30-40 players who took a fraction of what one MIGHT imagine them getting as Free Agents despite signing early B-You're so worried about offending him...but he seems a little miffed at the moment that the Brewers didn't even think enough of him to initiate some preliminary contract talks. He said he WANTED to be a Brewers. "That's the dream, to pitch your whole career in one uniform." So...I guess it's a good thing you didn't offend him by offering him half a contract that's never even been given to an actual FA, but it does sound like you've offended him by...doing nothing.

Yeah, the one I personally loved was Renfroe for Jaison Chourio. I mean...take away his brother and he's just a DSL player who had a solid year in the DSL. Yet...I still want to make that trade. Maybe not Renfroe(I actually like Renfroe and I doubt Cleveland, a team that clutches their wallet far tighter than we are is going to trade for a one year rental who'll cost ~10M next year). But pair the Brothers up...then when they're two versions of Fernando Tatis, you sign of them to long term Ronald Acuna Jr type deals and we've got MVP brothers for a decade. It's fool proof! IF we do trade Burnes and Woodruff though, we'd better get an absolute haul. Still think LAD make sense. They've got a bunch of pitchers who throw in the upper 90s, have one other plus pitch, but are questionable starting pitchers. I wouldn't mind just stacking those players together so we can replicate the Burnes/Woodruff 2018 duo except with an actual starting rotation that's...not Jhoulys Chacin or...Wade Miley who somehow turned into a good pitcher again. Most likely, this lineup will look about 90% the same next year. IF we trade a ace, we'll bring most everyone else back and then just hope whatever pitchers we get back are good and develop. If only we could have locked up Burnes during his disastrous 2019 season...then we could go all in, sign Woodruff to a much bigger deal and just keep this window open. But in Stearns last year, I think we run it back, hope we play better and if we don't, I actually trust him to sell quite a bit. Where he's terrible is trading for mediocre(or just terrible Daniel Norris type) relievers and giving up viable prospects. This team could come back, win 100 games and be a WS contender or come back and be 10 games out at the deadline and need to sell. I have no clue what we've got other than some valuable assets.

That kid is incredible. I just saw they upgraded his speed to a 70! At least I think that's an upgrade. I thought he was 60 hit, 60 power, and his speed was 55 or 60. I don't recall it being 70. Now, hopefully those pitchers will be hot on this groups heels!

Yeah, the bunting would have been more advantageous prior to the rule change. Forced teams to play them straight up. That said, if they still pull their GBs, teams will still shift on him as much as they can. I don't know if Stearns logic or the organizations in general was just simply...we can't rely on the HR ball as much, we need to put the ball in play and have some guys who can steal bags. Just a WAAY too early look at what 2024 could look like(at some point) 1-Frelick(CF/LF) 2-Adames(SS) 3-Yelich(DH) 4-Wiemer(RF) 5-Rowdy(1B) 6-Chourio/Mitchell/Ruiz(CF/LF) 7-Turang-(2B/3B) 8-Quero-(C) 9-Black-(2B/3B) First thought is...my GOD is it going to be tough to get a ball to drop in that OF. Particularly on days when you throw Frelick/Mitchell and Ruiz, Wiemer, Chourio in the OF. Also, Black may be a defensive question, but that could be a very good defensive IF. I've also caught myself picturing Devanny in there at 3B due to Zarr's effusive praise of his defense. And the most obvious...this is like one of those Baseball reference lineup's where they get like 3 right. BUT, this would be ideal. 6 guys in their pre-arby years(MAYBE allowing some expenditures for certain pitches with 98MPH cutters). But there is speed up and down that lineup. Even for a catcher, Quero has solid speed...at least not Molina-esque speed(also, expecting him to be an MLB starter at C in 2024 is very optimistic, but it's my list.I'm also ready to offer about 6 of these guys 6 year contract extensions with 3 team options RIGHT NOW). A lot of guys who make contact, get on base and you've still got all types of power. IF Wiemer hits, if Chourio carries on, Adames at least has power, if he gets back to last years version, he'll be a 200M type FA(luckily we've got another plus defensive SS ready to step in) and Rowdy. And, in theory, you could also have Devanney, Urias, Feliciano, and Hiura on the bench to balance out a HEAVY LHed lineup. Predicting what in the hell Hiura's going to be doing and what role he'll have moving forward is the definition of a fools errantd though! Still, very bright and exciting offensive future!

Walker DEFINITELY looks the part. There was that feeling as a Packers fan early in the NFCCG a couple years ago. We ran a little outside toss play to Aaron Jones, and Devin White just FLEW to the ball, didn't get caught in the wash and he blew Jones up. That set the tone for the day. Quay had a couple of hits like that. I don't actually know(more like remember) the lapses in coverage, but that's going to take the longest time to come around. His pass rush really started to look good as the game wore on. I know he's cleared(or expected to be) for the Bears game, but I hope that shoulder isn't going to be something that lingers all year long. He excels by getting those long arms and those hands on the OL, shedding and pursuing. It works pretty well coming off the edge and it works well...just playing FB. Hopefully it was just a stinger. As for Savage, he didn't play well, but on that one deep crossing patter where Jefferson was running wide open and Savage was the closest to him(well, one of the times) MLF came out and said they were in cover 4 and it was Amos who didn't get a deep enough drop. On another one when they were OBVIOUSLY in man and Savage got burned...well, that's just a failure in schme. Also, Jefferson is SO good and so smart, he ran that route a little more shallow than I'd guess it was initially designed for in order to get the natural rub, Savage had to avoid his own guy and...another big play. To be clear, I'm not disagreeing that there was a whole lot of reason to be excited about Savage in 2020(or even as a rookie) and then he regressed last year...just pointing out that I don't think he played any worse than Stokes, Douglas, Amos...really any DB not named Jaire. Joe Barry may wanna study some of Saban's cover 3 match schemes and how he tweaks them. It's gonna leave some big holes in the defense if you're playing a zone scheme and then matching up Jaire in man, but they're going to be slowly developing routes and it sure beats letting Jefferson run loose all game long when you have JAIRE ALEXANDER. For now, we should all take Bill Belichick's advice(if you ignore it's not Bellichick and we're not playing Cincinnati!

No, that's most definitely not "it." You seem hell bent on taking a sentence and then somehow skewing that to derive some larger point while consistently missing the very, basic, simple...almost comically simple point. That Attanasio still wants to sign Woodruff and Burnes is not "IT," it's...as you said a publicity stunt. So that was ONE ancillary point and it's easier to ignore the kinda indisputable points being made and focusing on the parts that are easier. Finally, I don't know why you're pointing out pitchers who were signed with 4-5 years of service time when...LITERALLY, this ENTIRE discussion is about where Corbin Burnes was LASTR YEAR with THREE years of service time. It's almost as if you're not getting the point(which...I've read your posts, I don't believe that it's) or you're being intentionally obtuse and ignoring the point. Again...not that it matters as Burnes has 3 years of service time last year, but deGrom signed a contract extension coming off a Cy Young season and one of the most dominant seasons from at starting pitchers Still...I'm not sure what THIS has to do with anything. Cool. I don't know what that Paul Dolan's comments have to do with anything, but Cleveland offered Lindor a record setting extension, guaranteeing him over 100M dollars when he was 23...which would have broken records for players with his service time. The RAYS just committed up to 223M dollars to Wander Franco. An organizational tendency is not an absolute rule. Ya know how I know that? Brewers offered Darvish 100M+ Brewers signed Yelich Now Lindor turned down the deal. On the other hand, Jose Ramiez...he didn't, did he? No, he signed a 5 year contract extension with 2 team options. Then...he signed a 7 year 140M dollar contract extension. Why? Because he was already locked up. I'm confused, is that "market value," for a player with 3 top 5 MVP finishes and has been worth 6.2 WAR PER full season since that 2017 extension? Because you're telling me that with 3 years left on his deal, Burnes would have cost 30-35M dollars...and it's just curious why so many players who sign while they're still under team control get less than FAs on the open market. Huh...maybe we'll never know the answer to that one... If you think THAT'S the point of contention...you very much struggling to grasp the point behind this thread. Which again, feels intentionally(I really WANT to give you the benefit of the doubt on that one).

You didn't have to give him "half his value," his value with 3 years left of team control was considerably less than the 35M number that's being thrown around here.

Seems like all these proposals are just kinda for fun and the suggestion is to get MLB players back for prospects. NOT to trade our top prospects for more prospects. Also, I remember you throwing out a trade suggestion of something like Ruiz and Small for Bryan Reynolds. I think you had someone else in that deal, but it was...not a significant prospect(Ecerg or Lutz maybe). People are invested in this team and they like throwing around their ideas and proposals(as you do as well). The only way you're getting Bryan Reynolds without giving up 3 of our top 10 prospects is if you are...playing a video game. The Pirates were asking for Julio Rodriguez, they were asking for like 3 top 30 prospects. So Ruiz and Small would be laughed at. Yeah, I think he's doing a little/lot too much. I don't see why the Rangers make that trade, not sure the Mets do(though it's fair-ish) and I don't see the Brewers turning over the roster, but that's what this forum is for. Your ideas on how to move forward.

This much is very clear. That's just a absurdly intellectually dishonest recap of my position. My is ALMOST so stupidly simple that...I'm genuinely baffled how people DON'T understand it. Adambr seemed to understand it quite well. So...does this really NOT make ANY sense to you? But I'll reiterate...because SOMEHOW...despite ALL rationale, you CONTINUALLY misrepresent my VERY-VERY simple position. For a team that is STILL publicly talking about re-signing Corbin Burnes(see Mark Attanasio April 14th comments this year)...to not even ENGAGE in any type of feeling out process. To not get ANY type of idea of what it would take to re-sign him, THAT is my problem. Now this fictional strawman that you've created that I'm mad they didn't offer him and then sign him for a MASSIVE market level extension that you seem to believe despite literally ALL evidence to the contrary, players who have 3 years of arbitration left just do not get. That we didn't-even-talk to him about it. That is a failing on the front office and if you disagree, fine. Stop coming up with these asinine arguments that you assign to me, claiming I've made and then argue against that logic. For example; What the hell are you even talking about here? Yeah, I TOTALLY forgot that he was "paid to perform." Thanks ever so much for that insightful reminders. -Nobody said he "needs" any additional motivation. -Nobody said that a contract extension would make him "feel warm and fuzzy inside." But...JUUUUST maybe...despite your instance that players with 3 years or arbitration get paid just as if they're on the open market, juuust maybe he was willing to sign a contract that would BOTH guaranteed him 100M+ dollars AND be team friendly and affordable. You're right though...the REAL problem is we want to make Corbin feel all "warm and fuzzy" inside because otherwise he just won't pitch well. That...and just maybe we'll lost the best pitcher we've ever developed without making ANY effort to sign him or even TALK to him about signing an extension.

I am in a survivor pool with 40 people, 25 buy-in...(I won it last year when the last 10-12 people took NY teams earlier in the season and the both won games they should not have won...not a pool where actually knowing FB helps you at all). Anyway...I might seriously take the Buccs as my "survivor" vs the Packers in that game. I think it'll be the 1st game we see Bahk and Jenkins, but the Packers do NOT play well in Florida humidity early in the year. Jax, Miami, TB, they struggle. Saints last year in a neutral game...it's always ugly. As for the Bears, they look like they've got a good defense, and they're returning a edge with 18.5 sacks, but I don't actually think he's a premiere pass rusher. They have a terrible OL. Quay Walker's availability is going to be a big issue with Fields ability to extend plays, but Gary, Smith, Clark and the rest of the front should have a big day. The same thing happened last year. This is why I wanted Jim Leonhard as our DC. He likes to play a lot of cover 2 man...he mixes it up a little bit, with SOME cover 3, some single high where he'll bring a guy down in the box, but a cover 3 shell where you're using Quay and Campbell to get deep drops just gives the offense FAR too many easy throws. I still think Barry will be fine, but last year it took LaFleur calling him out and telling him he wanted them to play more "sticky." Meaning...don't give them 10 yard cushions. Don't sit back in zone. You have TWO outside CBs who EXCEL in press man and you've invested the largest contract in NFL history and a 1st round pick in them. Douglas isn't great in man coverage, but he's physical and should be trying to route his man toward the LBers in the hook zone. What you CANNOT do is allow the Vikings to run those deep crossing routes, hope to get home with 4 pass rushers(with one almost always being Enagbare or Gavin as they seemed to try and stagger Gary/Smith's reps) and then pass Jefferson off to Savage on those deeper routes. I'm confident they'll get that figured out. Baffling. And as I will with David Stearns and company, I give the Packers coaching staff the benefit of the doubt...they know far more than us. But are they maybe a bit too rigid? I never thought Billy Turner was a good OL and Dennis Kelly was a journeyman. So that combo made no sense last year. Yosh earned that start over Kelly and Turner wasn't good as a RG...he was somehow a bit better at RT, but not great. He was never even close to average at LT. This year the right side...Hanson and Newman? Seemed like Newman and Tom at RG/RT made SO much more sense, but...I digress. I really think Hanson is our 11th best OL at the moment. Obviously it's not that simple as Caleb Jones isn't playing Center, but we have(or had) depth at C. And we'll have it again. I'm not wishing for the season ending injury that paved the way for Jenkins to start 14+ games as a rookie, just the common sense. I am still completely confident the Packers get Bahk and Jenkins back. If the Packers weren't the ONE team in the NFL that didn't use Torodol(Which if you know what it is, it's not a numbing agent, it's not a pain killer, it's like an anti-inflammatory on steroids that just makes you feel...night and day different. But I'm sure if they needed them or if this was later in the season, they'd play both. That's from Rappaport. So...they're participating in team activities, they're out there, Bahk says he feels healthy and he feels normal. Jenkins was frustrated he wasn't allowed to play. But 2-1 starts have no gotten us to the SB the last couple years. Losing those two players however, it can EASILY be argued they cost us at LEAST one trip to the Super Bowl and possibly two. Aaron Rodgers was pressured on nearly 40% of his drop backs vs Tampa in what was a 5 point loss. Bahk takes Shaq Barrett or JPP out of that game(at least mostly) and now you can help out Billy Turner with Lewis or a RB or whatever. But Rodgers knows where the pass rush is coming. Last year, the 49ers got onto a run where they pressured the Cowboys and Rams more than any other team had that year and Rodgers was pressured on ~38% of HIS drop backs. That causes a QB to stop dropping his eyes, looking at the pass rush and that's how Allan Lazard running wide open happens. So I'm more concerned with how those two are playing later in the year and that they're fully healthy. Bahk is a Packer through next season ALMOST no matter what. Jenkins one would presume would be extended. Again, Bahk/Runyan/Myers/Tom/Jenins, that's as good as it gets in the NFL. So I both understand the desire to get them back ASAP. You get them back, the pressure on the WRers drops exponentially as they have more time to uncover, Rodgers isn't getting rocked, the running game has more room to get going and...the trickle down impact on the offense is immeasurable. The other side to that argument...you're putting your franchise QB and you're real hope at winning a SB at risk by NOT putting out your best OL. So I'll be better the under again. I'll be expecting a 24-13 type game vs the Bears and hopefully they can keep Rodgers upright, get the quick passing game doing and...for the love of GOD, no more drops on walk in TDs. Though just for perspective, Julio, Calvin, Chase, Adams, TO, Cris Carter(arguably the best hands in NFL history)...they all struggled with drops. Some of them figured it out quicker than others, but if Christian Watson makes that catch and the Packers score on 1st and Goal from the 1, this game could easily have gone the other way. Of course that brings up an entirely different issue with me. Why Rodgers INSISTS on running plays out of shotgun on 4th and 6 inches is baffling. We know MLF prefers to go under Center there, give the back a 7 yard start and let him pick his hole, but when you come out in that inside zone, the defense invariably KNOWS where you're going to run that ball...if you do in fact run the ball. And on that play, you ran it behind Jake Hanson and Davlin Tomlinson absolutely ate him up. I guess you just chalk it up as Packers in Week 1, you look at how much better they were this year than last year and look at the 3 key starters who are getting healthy and coming back in Bahk/Jenkins and Lazard and console yourself in that and the fact that this team SHOULD look much better in 2 months. So...that's mostly the good news. 'It shouldn't be that bad next time.' And then there is the fact that Quay's should injury wasn't that serious(he was the 2nd most impressive defensive player IMO behind Clark) Nixon also avoided a seriously injury. For a team going with 4 CBs on game day, that's good news. Barnes-Went from an obvious season ending injury to a high ankle sprain and likely going to IR, but not out for the year. Runyan-Concussion...normally a week to 2 weeks, but that's a more serious injury that I think they should always take extra time with. I still feel good about 12 wins and this team playing it's best FB at the end of the season.

It really seems obvious from MY(our) perspective. It also seemed obvious Jake Hanson was NOT one of the top 5(arguably, top 10). But I can only see the plays where they kinda zero in on the players. I've stopped watching All-22 for a couple years now because...I'm just busier and...well, it doesn't matter what I think. But yeah, I think you could make a very strong argument he's been the best Packers OL to play this year for the Packers. Myers has been really solid. Yosh still isn't taking that next step. He's average(which is very valuable and not a slight, particularly when he's a backup). Royce Newman I think will get better....I really can't offer much of an opinion on him. I did try to watch Hanson during the game and man...just rag dolled. Tomlinson, with Za'Darius rushing over him. Good for Za'Darius...he's taking an imagined slight and played well. Quick side note on him, he took 1 year and about 9 Million dollars to play for the Vikings. So that bug crawled WAAAY up there. I can pretty much guarantee the Packers would have offered more and we know the Ravens did(not just in total money, but in guaranteed money). A ~3.5M cap hit...there is virtually no way the Packers don't give him that same deal. No risk, they can get out of it next year, they can keep him for a still relatively cheap cap hit. He REALLY wanted to play against the Packers. I'll feel so-so much better when he's facing Bahktiari and Jenkins rather than Yosh, Newman and then kicking inside and just bulldozing Hanson.

Yup...and then Zach Tom came into the game and played REALLY well. Packers develop OL as well as anyone...and while they struggled this past week(badly) that was to be expected with backup OTs in there vs two premiere edge rushers(Hunter was on course to be an All Pro type edge with his freakish athletic ability before injuries the past couple years). What's baffling to me is how the Packers seem unwilling to start the OL who is so clearly one of the 5 best. Tom, especially when Bahk and Jenkins are out, is definitely in that group. Again, reminds me of when they started Lane Taylor over Elgton Jenkins. I've liked Caleb Jones and with the ability to bring up 4 players each week without using a 53 man roster spot, I like bringing Jones up. Let Tom focus on playing inside. And lets get Jake Hanson the hell out of that starting lineup. He was BRUTAL in week 1. Davlin Tomlinson is nice, but he's not Vita Vea. What is HE going to do to Jake Hanson? I blindly went along with the "well, they must know better," but now that we've seen him play...it seems clear there wasn't much to see.

Sure, but we guaranteed 35.5 million total to those two players and got back a combined 15 years potentially(2 option years each). 15.5M to Peralta and 20 to Ashby. If they never pitched again, you could throw them in a trade and get out of that. Giving a guy who's got a year of production 100M guaranteed or 72M is a very different thing. Not EVERY deal we sign with a prospect has to be so overwhelmingly team friendly. I'd love it...as long as we signed more. But I don't get why either pitcher(Ashby especially given he's NOT from a 3rd world Country which plays a large role in it apparently and he comes from an upper middle class household)...they would have signed if they hadn't......well, ya know.

Well, if you've got actual connections to the Brewers in some capacity, obviously I'll take your word for it over the MJS article saying they hoped he'd be able to play in the Fall League. I have...no concept what the recovery type on a scapula would be. I've never heard of someone breaking it in any athletic activity. I guess just based on my ignorance, I'd say the bone would probably take 8 weeks to heal, but that's in an area where there are a lot of other muscles or possible complications with the back. Last thing you want is a prospect of his caliber to come back before their ready. These prospects get a splinter, they go on the 7 day IL. But it'd be great if he was ahead of schedule and could participate. He's been overlooked this year when talking about the best pure hitters in our system.

EXACTLY. I think it's fair to say this is the best pitcher the Brewers have ever produced. It's not that they didn't sign him. It's that they didn't even talk to him and HE himself seems to be a bit confused about that. Also, this isn't like Hader. He was a closer who was going to make ~17M next year. Burnes is a legitimate ace who has 5 pitches and throws an upper 90s cutter. Suffice to say I'm skeptical that the Brewers could have or would have come to terms with Burnes. I'm far more skeptical of Mark Attanasio's suggestions that the Brewers can extend Burnes moving forward(a statement he recently made). What I am certain about is that if you don't OFFER a deal with a hometown discount, you're not going to get one. It's fair to ask why they didn't offer him a contract before the lockout. They still had time and teams have signed key players since the extension. As for erring on the side of caution, I'll just point to the Atlanta Braves. I don't know if any team has set themselves up better in terms of signing players to team friendly deals in Baseball history(since Curt Flood that is) than the Braves. Albies, Acuna Jr, Harris, Olson, Riley... I also don't think Ryan Braun or Christian Yelich and their respective contract's should play any role in what you choose to do moving foward with a player. Braun's second extension always looked a little questionable, but neither contract informs what the Brewers should do moving forward. If the Brewers are lucky enough that say...Jackson Chourio or whomever...they develop into an MVP caliber player and they're willing to take an extremely team friendly deal. Do you not do it because Yelich' fell off out of nowhere? We should also note, Yelich contract is not a good one. It's also not quite as bad as people are inferring. It's 22M a year. Not a deal anyone would give him right now, but it's not like You certainly didn't start extending 35 year old hitters because Molitor went on and had arguably his best seasons after the age of 35 when Bando ran him out of town. I won't be mad when the Brewers can't extend him. I'll root for him when he signs with the Dodgers or we trade him. I'll still be a fan. I am mad and frustrated that the Brewers made seemingly ZERO effort to even gauge his possible interest. Would we ever sign a guy like Acuna Jr or Michael Harris to a contract for 100M or 72M dollars when they're 21 or so and OBVIOUS stars? Or will we just say, "why would a guy like that even bother," then wait until he's a year away from free agency, make an obviously unrealistic offer and do the, "welp, we tried." I like this front office, I like Attanasio. Love the way they've built. I do have a big issue with this though. With ALL the cheap, position talent coming up right now, having that rotation anchor could be HUGE.

I agree. The idea that a player with three years left of team control is going to get full market value...that is ABSOLUTELY nonsense. How about 4 years left? They also get full market value? In what world does a player sign an extension years away from Free Agency and NOT take less money than they would if they were due to become a Free Agent? This is like...basic, basic stuff here. 1-No, a contract was never offered or discussed. 2-No, a contract was never offered or discussed. 3-It's impressive how you can tell me exactly how Corbin Burnes FEELS about...literally every issue. You KNOW how he feels about the prospect of a contract extension...despite him stating in an incredulous tone that the Brewers never even approached the Cy Young winner about an extension. But sure...plenty of players complain about the salary arbitration pay structure. Which is why you see SOME players take that first guaranteed payday. That's MAYBE why you approach the 26 year old and simply ask if he'd be interested in a contract extension that would guarantee him well over 100M. Who ever suggested otherwise? ??? Do I need to cite a pitcher who suffered a shoulder injury due to pitching in order to convey the point that SOMETIMES pitchers choose the certainty of that first big contract? Is that point really lost because Nelson happened to hurt his shoulder on the bases? And no, the arbitration rules do not make it "a given that players will earn more going year to year in arbitration than selling off their arbitration eligible years up front." You think if they'd have signed Burnes to an extension prior to this season, it's a "given" he'd have earned less than 6.5? Seems unlikely...certainly not a "given." So...because Acuna Jr got 100K as a signing bonus and Burnes got 500K, THAT'S explains why Acuna Jr was willing to take the 100M dollar deal, but why Burnes wouldn't? Ok...so how about Michael Harris? He was a 3rd round pick who got a larger signing bonus than Burnes. HE comes from a 1st world Country. Using your logic here, why would he sign that? I mean, 1st world Country, 500K signing bonus, starting off with a 5 WAR rookie season? Lets look at past extensions for Brewers. Ryan Braun...top 5 pick. Signed for ~2.5M. If the driving force behind the Acuna Jr extension is the 100K signing bonus he got and the driving force behind Burnes NOT being willing to sign a contract extension is that he got all of 500K, why would Braun sign one? And then ANOTHER one? And MY post was "all a bunch of Nonsense?" ? Your rationalization for why the Brewers...who are STILL talking about re-signing "this group," namely Burnes, didn't even broach the subject of a contract extension is comical.

I missed this. Are you saying that 3 years into the future...IF the Brewers had made an offer to Burnes, now he can use that offer to get a contract when he's on the open market? But, you mentioned Bryant. Just...to illustrate the point how players values can decrease, he turned down a 250M dollar contract with the Cubs. Ending up signing with one of the worst run franchises in Colorado(I sincerely doubt he WANTED to go there) and he signed for significantly less. In fact, Bryant went from 8/250 extension to a 7/182. From the Cubs where he was a cult hero...to the Rockies who give away historically great players while paying the other team to take them.

“You would think maybe there would have been some initial talks last offseason, but nothing.” Doesn't sound like he's thrilled by it.

I'm talking about Corbin Burnes coming out and publicly stating that the Brewers didn't even approach him while he was THREE years away from free agency...and players THREE years away from free agency do not get paid market value for those three arbitration years. Bit tougher when the team not only doesn't make an offer, but doesn't even engage in talks. Players are the ones making the decisions. Pitchers in particularly are not always best served going year to year. Jimmy Nelson for example, NOT best served going year to year. Except the players who sign extensions...or possibly, AGAIN, with 3 years of arbitration and about 2M in career earnings thus far on top of his under slot ~500K signing bonus as a 4th round pick. But now, almost through another season, NOW Mark Attanasio wants to talk about a contract extension for Corbin Burnes and he really wants to keep him together. Of course the "money has to be right." That doesn't mean that the money has to be top of the FA market type money, but again...3 years of arbitration left changes that equation. Each year changes that equation. The cost to sign goes up, the impetus to sign and guarantee yourself 100+M goes down. That you believe they couldn't have signed him is...immaterial to this particular discussion. To not even get an idea of what it'd cost...to not even talk to him...it's just a bad look. I'll once again use Ronald Acuna Jr. NOBODY would have predicted that extension saying he'd never accept it. And he wouldn't have...if the Braves had never approached him and started the talks. Burnes likely doesn't sign an extension, that's not even the point here. Not even talking to him about one, that's not doing your due diligence. Especially for an owner still talking about signing him now, but who still hasn't had any talks with him. Anyway, I'll check this out later...