UpandIn

Yeah, I really love the Rich Bisaccia hire, but if we're going to give Leavitt a 53 man spot...even if he starts on IR and then Tariq Carpenter, we really only have 3 safeties. We'd be playing Douglas at Safety with Amos. I'd guess Thomas can play there. Abernathy is an impressive athlete. Maybe there's something there. Same with Gaines. Suddenly cutting Scott when he'd been getting snaps with the #1s...they clearly aren't real confident in anyone behind the obvious 2. It's clear they've got confidence in their depth on the DL. That's looked...incredible. I'd suggest possibly trading Lowry in favor of keeping Slayton, but Lowry played so well the last 10-12 games, not sure they'd risk it. Though keeping 6 as Wyatt doesn't look quite ready, that's possible. Edge looks a lot better now than it did a few weeks ago. McDuffie looks like a completely different player at LBer. He and Barnes provide depth there. But that secondary, it does look pretty thin. With Hamilton falling to the Ravens and Baltimore having a thing DL, maybe they could trade from depth. Lowry for Chuck Clark? He doesn't have the speed to be a FS like Savage, he's more like Amos, but reliable, smart. Player for player trades, as unlikely as they are, could work in this case. They lost Derek Wolfe to retirement, Campbell is getting older.

Yeah...he's pretty similar, but he's a whole lot better. And we do come out in a lot of 12 personnel. I'd be thrilled to get a 6'6 250 pound TE...who's really more of a slot WRer(though his blocking, like Tonyan's has improved). But for all the money the Packers can and have(and will continue) to kick down the road...it's not unlimited. Jenkins is up, he's going to get ~15M per year(that may be conservative). Gary is getting close. He's likely to get ~25 per. And then Amos is a FA. We might have a lot of cap room available this year, but...as I'm sure most people on here know, that's wildly mis-leading. So 11M for a TE who's right on the verge of being elite, plus I'd imagine a 3rd round pick(and very possibly a 2nd from the Packers), doesn't seem wise. As Andrew Brandt said, 'the salary cap doesn't prevent you from signing anyone, poor personnel decisions do.'

Yes, and that reason was because he wasn't in great shape and there were questions about his ability to move his feet. He's in better shape than was ever in-in College...and I actually have been at several practices. He's been impressive. And...for what it's worth, it seems like others are starting to believe Jones makes the 53 man as well. https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/news/green-bay-packers-roster-projection-4-0#gid=ci02a98fa7e00025f2&pid=running-backs-2

It's certainly not hard to envision Ashby going from 4.5 ERA to a 3.00 ERA guy by cleaning up some of the 0-2 issues, some of the 1st pitch issues. Where he's really struggling. ESPECIALLY relative to the rest of the league.

I don't agree with that. A 2nd year, that's two "bites of the apple." I don't actually believe that they make that trade, but if they chose to do so, I think the return would be SIGNIFICANTLY higher now than in another year. I think the argument for getting back an impact, middle of the order hitter(ideally 3B) came from filling in the lineup FOR Woodruff and Burnes. If they're trading them...then of course you have to go out and get pitching. I've suggested trade parameters, but all of them include TOR type pitchers who are at LEAST in HiA, mostly in AA. We've seen the Brewers built around offense(Weeks, Hardy, Prince, Hart, Braun..etc...). They were hit or miss and needed to go all in to get to the playoffs. We've seen these last 4 years, teams built on pitching. Save for someone like Jung from the Rangers, pitchers should be the priority in any potential trades involving Woodruff and or Burnes...in MY opinion.

Agreed. I did think Douglas would be a candidate to play some safety...but I didn't think it'd be an issue until later on. Not this year. He's long, physical, a ball hawk, plays better reading the QBs eyes, struggles in press man with his back turned. Still probably just a contingency vs Savage getting injured, but if they do see Douglas as a potential safety, get King back in now. Nixon looks like he can play. He'd be the #3 CB in that scenario. Then there's a sizeable drop off with Jean-Charles looking the best, after that, it's Thomas I guess with Ento, Gafford, both converted WRers who have some talent, but...you don't want them taking big snaps now. King for 350K SB and the Vet minimum of ~1.2 would only add 350K to the cap. I get people don't love him, but as a #4 CB, he's well worth it. Well that just seems strange. This is probably a PS tryout at this point. See if he's in shape, moving alright. It'll be real interesting to see who gets what snaps on the OL this last game. Do they play Caleb Jones a lot to see if he's worth a 53 man spot...or to see if they can get a pick for him. I'd guess they'd play those they expect to play opening day less. A few series. So how much Tom plays at RT could inform how close they think Jenkins is, Yosh at LT. Hanson or Newman at RG...one of the few positions that still seems up in the air. I'd also love to see Caleb Jones playing RT. If...for some inexplicable reason Nijman IS actually struggling to play RT...which is strange to me as he's played it in College, he spent the first few years rotating back and forth and he's an incredible athlete, but if that's the case, it'd be nice to have that mountain of a man capable of being a swing tackle or...just a backup RT while Yosh/Tom/Jenkins provide depth at LT.

I think you may be underestimating Jones chances of making the 53 man. Men his size who move as he does...I don't think you roll the dice. Hanson does seem like he'll make the roster. Coaches are seeing something I'm not(obviously). That they got a pick for CVL tells me there's virtually no shot he's going to make it through waivers. Teams have seen too much of him. Walker, I'd guess he goes on IR. We haven't seen anything from him, but at his size, his athletic ability and seemingly zero chance he'll make the 53 man, they could put him on waivers. OT's are so valuable, maybe someone would claim him. Been a bit strange not hearing anything about what Non-Football injury he suffered. Is this why he slipped to the 7th? The knee issues that concerned teams? https://walterfootball.com/ws2022rwalker.php But I wouldn't risk Caleb Jones. Not with Jenkins due to be a FA next year(even if it's a near given he's extended). But Bahk, he's no lock to stay healthy. Nijman has looked good, but even last year, he was good FOR a 3rd string LT, but still below average. Beautiful problem to have. Too many OL and DL worthy of a 53 man spot. DL may be an even more difficult call. Slayton...he may be playing his way onto someone's 53 man. Ford and Heflin less likely, but they still both look good. Truthfully, Slayton should be in the rotation to start the season, but obviously Wyatt is a lock. He has to play better.

That should have been in blue. I was kidding. I appreciate all the details and have all year! The good along with the occasional ugly...

Ya know, as much as I enjoy your details on all the play by play, the way you describe Ruiz's perfect bunts, Weimer's cannon, Mitchell going the other way, etc...etc...every once in a while...I'd prefer ignorance!? I'm sure it's something else and the odds of him helping have plummeted after this outing...but I'm still hoping we win a WS, so I don't jump off a bandwagon until it crashes into Clayton Ravine...

Well...I guess we have to hope that it's just him working his way back after not having pitched for a while. Not much else we can do at this point. It was always a little foolish to count on him coming back and being dominant, but if he can come back and get his feel back...well, he could still help.

If you're asking literally, Tristan Peters. If you're making a point, ie, we didn't give up much for him(as others have argued), then I'd argue he is pretty obviously blocked, but he's the type of guy you could use as a trade chip a year into the future and he'd performed pretty well in his first full year. A hitter who's reached AA. So not a huge deal, but the very type of player who a year from now would fit the "near MLB ready prospect," label so many teams seem interested in for the 2nd tier players on the trade market.

C'mon...really? So keep two big guys who are lefties and limited to 1B/DH on the 40 man? And THAT would have made fans happier?

Renfroe has one more year of arby left. I'd guess ~11M next year. Wong is a pretty obvious one to me, but I MIGHT actually pick up that option. It costs 8M as we've got a 2M buyout...and he looks like he may be the top 2B on the FA market. We'll get a better idea by the end of the year, but you might be able to deal him, save that 2M and get back a decent prospect for him(I'm talking about one or two 40-45 FV type prospects). I'll make one bet. If we hear about the Brewers making offers to Burnes or Woodruff, the chances they get traded start going up. We usually don't hear about these offers unless they're not real offers. Like Sabathia, Grinke, Prince...among others. That could lay the floor for saying, "he didn't want to sign here and we could lose him for nothing," for whomever they're talking about(but I'd love to be proven wrong and actually sign one).

All great points. You could, in theory, still be a competitive team if you moved on from Burnes AND Woodruff. This could be the best time to do it or the worst. There is such a HUGE gap between how these prospects could perform...maybe it's better to find these teams that have been mentioned(the Baltimore deals suggested are both GREAT deals returns that are just insane). Right now, you have a 2 year window...and when you've got Burnes and Woodruff, you could win a WS in either of those two years. I still think they could win it this year. IF you trade them though, then maybe keep Turang in AAA until it's late enough in the year that you get another year out of him, maybe you deal Adames if he hits. Build up this farm system so it's a top 2-3 system with 4-5 more power arms who'd be in AA or above next year, plus a corner IFer, a slew of OF prospects, some 2B prospects. I've already thrown out a bunch of names, but two years of a Cy Young for a team starved for winning or one that's so close like Toronto or maybe we raid the Angels for everything they've got while they try and convince Ohtani to stick around(that guy generates so much revenue, you might be able to get them to take back most of Yelich's contract to get Burnes AND still grab a couple prospects(they've got a 2nd round pick from St. Mary's...which would be nice symetry). Maybe Burnes+Yelich+Peralta and his surplus value to get rid of Yelich's big contract for O'Hoppe+Bush+Bachman+Madden+ a couple other lotty tickets. Gives the Angels 2 pitching prospects, an OFer ahead of Trout who can get on base and give them a short term window to try and help Ohtani stick around. 3 high upside arms, a good catching prospect, plus a couple lower level guys and you reset the payroll. It'd be like going through one of those MASSIVE Astros/Orioles like rebuilds...but you'd be skipping the 2-3 years of 100 loss teams and be looking at almost 0 money on the books for 2025 year when these prospects could be hitting their strides. And the fan reaction to this type of move would likely be akin to Disco Demolition reaction but over a whole season! I really wouldn't want to be the one making any of these decisions though...I just don't know how I'd be able to trade Corbin Burnes or Woodruff. And ultimately, I don't think we actually will.

Agreed...and this is why I keep going back to the Rangers. All the money they spent on those middle IFers, Seager and Seimen. They have a 23 year old at 3B who was a top 100 prospect heading into the season. You send them Hunter Renfroe to give them another bat in the OF, one of their few weak spots...and then you ask for the moon back. Get back Jung, Wright, Rucker and then 2 more lower tier prospects. If they don't go for it, they don't, but I'm with you. The Mets, Baty, Prada, Tidwell+2 or 3 more prospects. Pretty sure you're not getting Alvarez, but if you can get Baty and Alvarez+Tidwell, you have to consider that, don't you? And I wouldn't be afraid to sign a couple of these guys a month into the year if they look like they're competent hitters. Jung/Baty/Alvarez 6/60 with 3 options for 14 per. Frelick, something similar, maybe a little less. That's beyond premature, talking about contract extensions for prospects that aren't on your team and who you probably can't get...but it makes the inevitable sting of losing Burnes a little more palpable. And of course, the assumption that we're going to lose Burnes means we're DEFINITELY giving him a 5/140 extension with a 6th year TEAM option for 35M. 6/175. I don't really believe that'll happen, but with all the young, cost controlled players we've got coming up, I do think we could pull that off. It may not be wise, but... I do think Woodruff would be more receptive given his age and raynauds? 5/110, option for 30 and 10 buyout? 5/120 guaranteed?

I didn't know they did get paid. I suppose it'd make some sense, but it's such an outlier, I wouldn't really consider it a significant source of revenue...IF they got paid. Certainly wouldn't call it a "subsidiary" of the Brewers...but I don't know.

Exactly what "subsidiary" of the Brewers do you suppose is making money "hand over fist" for the owners of the Milwaukee Brewers. I don't even know what this stuff means. "report little earnings here." To who? Who are they reporting earnings to? They could sell the team, make over a billion dollars and do whatever they want. There is this fantasy that the Brewers are REALLY actually rolling in money but they only care about profits. The entire premise of this is flawed, even down to the idea that they signed McCutchen and "made the team worse since he's playing in front of a superior player." He wasn't when they signed him. He was coming off a .780 OPS, Hiura of a .570. He was so clearly a better player when they signed him. Who WAS the player they should have signed? I remember the calls for Nick Castellanos...5/100. I'm sure we'd have comments about how management needed to be smarter than to give up 100M for a player with a negative WAR. Kris Bryant, 7/182. Obviously unrealistic. Chris Taylor was another. 4/60 for a player who's been worse than McCutchen and of course, likely preferred to remain in LA. Rizzo would have been nice. Course the Yankees tend to be a bit more attractive to Free Agents(particularly those who are FAs FROM the Yankees). Marginal upgrade for at LEAST 15M more a year and likely more than that unless you believe he'd have preferred the Brewers. https://stathead.com/baseball/player-comparison.cgi?player_id2=tellero01&p1yrfrom=2022&type=b&player_id1=rizzoan01&p2yrfrom=2022&sum=0&request=1 I thought Eduardo Escobar would have been a nice player to bring back...though his -.43 WAR this year...and I'm just guessing here, the people frowning up on the signing of McCutchen and his .9 WAR, they'd likely be unhappy with Escobar. So I'm just curious...for all the fans they "drove away," who exactly should they have signed? I also say this with all sincerity, those fans, they probably should jump on another bandwagon. I'd suggest a team that's just printing money like the Cubs...but of course, they're not really spending money(other than to appease fans in the off-season). But the Mets seem like a good choice. They'll be able to outspend the pentagon...

I agree with this for the most part, but a couple points. Income from professional sports teams is tax free. This is why...I believe, the Nuttings for example still own the Pirates. The Angelos family, the Brown family in the NFL is just ROLLING in cash, taking in a couple hundred million a year. That's not the case with the Brewers. We don't know exactly what they make, but we've have a reasonable approximation. They could spend a bit more and I am fairly certain they would have if such a deal would have been available. They also need to approach their budget constraints with a modicum of common sense. Josh Hader in his 4th year of arbitration and projected to make 17M dollars was not the best use of that money. Now...without the benefit of hindsight(because the deal looks MUCH better in the immediate aftermath with Hader's meltdown)...they made a trade with the Padres wherein they downgraded pretty significantly in the pen, but still got back a valuable left handed reliever, then added a breakout CF prospect on the precipice of the big leagues, and a pitcher whom they thought VERY highly of. My issue with that trade remains the management of the roster and DFA'ing Lamet, but that wasn't about money. They then went out and traded for another reliever in Bush as well as a bit of a wild card in Trevor Rosenthal. So JUST for this years team, they got 3 relievers, none as good as Hader, but definitely better than what they had in their pen. For the future, they got potentially 12 years of cost controlled players. In truth though...this is a natural reaction. Rodgers was upset the Packers moved on from...Brett friggin Goode(among a long list of players). The Packers didn't let those players go because they could not afford to pay them. They let them go because they didn't think they were the best allocation of their resources. And they were usually right.

And where is he saying in there that Lauer(and/or others) SHOULD give money back or take a pay cut? He's stating the plain truth. The cost of keeping this team together is going up.

I like this debates. I don't like when they get intellectually dishonest. No, he didn't say they should be "responsible" because they're about to get paid...but lets also not infantilize these players. They understand how the game works. Lauer's going to going out and do what's best for him. I don't believe the inference was EVER made that he should take less money(which is what I assumed you meant by "be responsible) in arbitration. And you're absolutely right. It IS managements issue. And they addressed it. It's LAUERS responsibility to go out and pitch even if the Brewers made a trade. Where was this inference EVER made? Or even hinted at? That he should turn down the raise? He was pointing out an objective fact. One of the reasons they needed to move on from Hader was because of the rising costs of players. I don't actually think that's why they made THIS trade at this time, but it's just a reality. And I reject the notion that he's been underpaid. He's on a contract. It's a real simple system and literally the ONLY reason why Baseball exists outside of about 10-12 cities. MLB has a pretty powerful union. They could have JUST decided they wanted to change it. They didn't. Employees in nearly every field are underpaid relative to their worth early in their career. This can be true of the trades or any number of fields(medicine is a big one).

That makes no sense to me. How about Hiura at DH and Taylor/Davis in CF...for the next couple days.

They'll have ~29M committed to the '24 payroll with most of the rest of the team entering arbitration. I don't think the problem or the issue will being able to keep those players together and field a competitive team. The arbitration numbers will be big, but the Brewers are capable of a ~150M dollar payroll in 2 years. Hell, they're capable of it this year as Attanasio said there literally wasn't a player they couldn't have added financially). No, I'm not nearly as concerned with the debate about pushing the payroll up for a year while TV money increases(Again, NEVER to a point where they're remotely competitive with the big market teams, that's not even comparable, but enough to go 150-160 for a year). The debate will be do you trade Burnes/Woodruff and recyle you're talent like the Jays/Guardians and other successful smaller market teams do, or go the way of the Royals, ride it out, increase their payroll(they spent ~130 in '15 and then ~145 in '16) and watch their FA's walk for nothing? It'll be interesting to follow, but that lineup is likely to be relatively cheap, the rotation will be expensive, but it's one year. I don't think that'll be the issue. 2 years, Frelick, Turang, Mitchell, Weimer, they'll all be cheap. In two years, Chourio could even be up(not that I'm counting on it). Black could be up, Urias, Brooseau won't break the bank. But if we got that route, our "bits at the apple," will be much smaller the next couple years even with the likes of Misiokowski, Ashby, Gasser, Pertalta still in the rotation(and who knows who else). But 2025 would be a year with a couple or 3 QO's that get turned down and aces and SS's with power who I'm thinking could be a candidate if he bounces back next year and hits for better average. But all told, it'd be netting us 3 picks after the 1st round I believe. So they'll have to see where they think they are heading into 2024. Do they think they're one of the best teams in baseball? Or do they think they'd be better off picking up 3-6 top 100 prospects by trading both of them(and Adames at tht point because...wouldn't make much sense to keep him). This is going to be one of the most interesting storylines the next two years...and I suspect David Stearns place in the organization...should he BE a part of the organization will dictate which route they take.

It's still early and these guys have 0 hits for the Brewers, but a year ago, the BEST possible scenario for this minor league group(the 3 OFers promoted within, Turang, Black) was...what, hopefully a couple exceed expectations and produce in AA this year and get close enough to maybe get calls up by '23. Maybe Turang would hold his own again in AAA and be viewed as a utility guy. The draft, Frelick and Black...aside from the fluke injury, a CF and 2B/3B with 60 Hit tools. Weimer broke out and flew up the list. Mitchell has stayed healthy(seemingly his only issue) and he'd be the guy we'd be clamoring for is Frelick wasn't putting up video game like numbers(with the game on the easy setting). Turang has added power. You can go down through the younger levels of the system and see far more than just the young phenom Chourio absolutely exceeding expectations...you could go on forever, but this minor league season has gone about as well as possible. If someone would have said a year ago, the farm system could help the Brewers during their Burnes/Woodruff window, I'd have naturally assumed it was via trade. But Stearns...despite a couple of admittedly questionable decisions(Lamet, Peters for Rosenthal)…he's added to this system and it's quite clear their recent changes or...shift in the type of hitters they draft and develop is working well, while their ideology behind finding pitchers seems pretty damn good. I'm not sure I can think of a year where prospect development has been as good as this one. Even with the wide chasm between minor league success and MLB success, the Brewers have positioned himself...VERY well over the next couple years, whatever the decide to do with Woodruff and Burnes(a debate I don't even want to get into). So...the Brewers will still end up with the 20-24th ranked farm system, but by the end of next year, it's not unreasonable to see an MLB lineup with Frelick, Turang, Mitchell, Weimer,Ruiz, Black and Gasser on the bump. Probably not ideal, but that's the type of talent we have close to contributing right now. Speed everywhere, good contact skills, OBP, defense.

Well...they bother the hell outta me, but since everyone else is doing it, we might as well keep playing the guy crushing the ball when he DOES make contact(which...I get is basically what you're saying). I think there is a lot of validity to what Nate is saying. He SHOULDN'T be doing what he's doing. But...the fact is, the guy is mashing. Keep him out there. MAYBE you get him back to where he was as a prospect coming up. Maybe you just get a good, fluke year out of Hiura. Maybe he stops hitting next week and goes into a slump. None of that is a reason to NOT ride the hot hand RIGHT NOW.

Well...then with respect, saying he's made no adjustments is just objectively false. Irrespective of the results...which have been outstanding, the statement that he's made NO adjustments is kinda ridiculous. He's closed his stance, he's overhauled his swing. That's an adjustment. You're really clinging to the fact that he's struggling with Fastballs up...and he's CLEARLY attempting to lay off of them, but you know what makes it REALLY hard? When you're the best hitter on the team and yet you're getting sporadic playing time. For all the "it's luck, he won't keep it up," you may be right. OR maybe his exceptional bat speed and hand eye coordination will improve with more playing time. I don't particularly care right now as I want to see THIS team get into the playoffs and THIS team win a division and have a shot at a WS. Hiura is very obviously helping us do that MORE than Either way, numbers on a chart are a nice source of predictive analytics...but when a guy is on the field consistently producing NOW for a team desperately in need of a bat NOW...I really don't care. This feels like the Packers board with Love except for exact opposite reasons. You see the guy actually doing the thing on the field and it's somehow diminished. Now, in fairness...bringing up a post from 12 days ago after a big day, not a fan of that as that'll get REAL petty in a sport like baseball, but you doubled down on the "he hasn't made an adjustments." He very clearly has.