UpandIn

I don't think it's a pressing need. I agree, Bakh will be probably be back...Tom will get stronger. I really like Caleb Jones. Walker is a guy who if he keeps his body right could be an NFL starter. I just think Yosh has just one year left, Bakh may just have one year left...that's another player who's future is totally up in the air. Is he always going to be a guy who's knee could flair up from this point on or is he getting better? BUT, Tom could be a better fit at Center or Guard. Jenkins may well be gone. I really like Caleb Jones...but that was from pre-season. I don't think you go wrong loading up on either the OL or the DL. I wouldn't take a S, DT, TE unless they were like Kyle Pitts type talent. I'd take a DE like Jalen Carter and I'd move Clark back to your base NT either way. That was a failed experiment that didn't' work the first time around and it's not working now. He's just better as a NT. So it's just that, if there's a great OT available, a Wirfs, you take him. I'd be looking at WRer, Edge...maybe DE depending on who's available and it looks like there are some really talented OTs. I think we always exaggerate some of these needs. We're talking about Ford and Nixon as these FA losses when they were veteran bonus free agents. I think this last years draft is going to make a BIG jump next year. Obviously Watson, but Quay jumps off the screen at times, Wyatt as well. Tom looks like he'll be a 10 year starter. Doubs looked like the best pick until Watson went nuts and now people have forgotten about him. Enagbare. The yearly 3rd round bust seems to be Rhyan. That's a lot to put on him now, but given how bad we were at OG, the fact that he wasn't in the mix is telling. This will be a fascinating draft. Also remember we'll get an extra pick for MVS. It's really gonna come down to Aaron Rodgers though. If they believe they can rebuild this and come back and take another swing at it, they'll re-sign Amos(they'd need to do so before the first day of the league year or it'd be pointless as the 8M in dead cap space will accelerate, but if they do so before then, you could keep him and keep his cap hit under 8M). Crosby is likely the same type of decision. The kickoff thing was brought up last year also, but I don't think they're trying to kick it through the endzone. I think it's by design they kick it shorter and higher. And Crosby is falling off, but his hang time early in the season had been around that 4.4 mark...which is good. I'd imagine it's fallen and a 38 year old kicker seems like a logical place to go young. Even Bakh. If you DO trade Rodgers...and hypothetically Bakh comes back from this latest fluke after the bye and finishes the last 4 games like he's played the last 4-5, that's a really good LT that you MIGHT wanna trade if Love is your QB next year. It'll be interesting to see what they do...and we should know pretty early in the off-season with guys like Tonyan and Amos. The Bengals went from the 5th pick to the SB just last year, the Giants, Jets and others have turned it around quickly. A couple impact players and a DC can change the entire outlook. That said, I thought you saw enough from Love that it might be time for a more amicable breakup with Rodgers, get through cap purgatory we're inevitably going to have to go through, lock up Jenkins and Gary, probably Lazard and then try to get younger. They've also got to be working on some extension that will be announced soon. There's just no reason to restructure Lowry's contract at this point unless it's to create cap space for likely Lazard or Jenkins for this year(Jenkins would make the most sense as his cap hit just from a SB would likely increase quite a bit).

I don't think that's on Grey. DBs can only cover for so long. They have regressed, but Clark has struggled(he should be a primary NT, not a DE). The lack of a pass rush, particularly post Gary...and the play calling has hurt the secondary more than the coaching. Trying to assign blame to a particular coach for a position group is like trying to figure out if it's the hitting coach who's responsible for Yelich struggling. Either way, I didn't say make him the DC permanently, just an interim. You'd move on and get a full time DC after this year. And Leonhard still hasn't made his mind up. The JSO apparently jumped the gun and Fickell is bringing his DC from Cincy with him anyway. The point is to get Barry out and put Grey in there and play a more aggressive style. What's the point of keeping Barry when you know you're going to fire him? The DL has also been worse. I don't think that's on Montgomery. I think we just have a terrible DC who doesn't do anything that's the least bit surprising.

I completely agree, they definitely don't "need" a 1st...this just might be a case of BPA kinda lining up with a way to combine Watson with...as close to a clone of himself as you can get and give Love an insane young group of WRers. I'd prioritize OT, WRer and...if for some fluke reason an impact defensive player like Jalen Carter or Will Anderson falls, grab them(moving back and picking up a future 1st is an even better idea). I think it's also clear they're not sold on Nixon and they'd prefer a real return man. Palmer I haven't watched enough of. Jones I'm a big fan of. His 40 will have a big impact on his draft position. UGAs Ladd McConkey is another guy who I really like. This team is SO up in the air, but based on Gutekunst's comments that effectively say they're going to be picking up Love's option(at least that's how I read them). So what the hell are we doing? Are we doubling back down and keeping Rodgers and trying to get back to the SB, chalk this season up as a fluke with injuries and working the young guys in? If so, will we draft a Rashan Gary type player? That could be Tyree Wilson in this class. Or do we want a more immediate impact player? I don't think they trade for Watson last year(at least two 2nds) if Rodgers wasn't at the point in his career he is. We overpaid and I don't think anyone expected him to be this explosive early on. Still, that way of roster building isn't smart over the long haul and I don't think it leads to those types of hits all that often. If we're just building for Love, then it gets much easier. You take Wilson...if you think he's the BPA or you take Parris Johnson even if you believe Bakh will be back next year and he's getting healthier. Personally, I could see this team turning it around very quickly...but I still think we're best served moving on from Rodgers and trying to work out an amicable trade. The Titans/Raiders make the most sense...and I THINK you could still get a 1st for him. Rodgers sounds like he's planning on playing for a couple more years at this point.

Because he's better at 2B. -1 OAA at 3B. +4 at 2B Adames clearly has the physical attributes to be an elite 3B as well as an elite SS. All scouting reports and internal comments suggest Turang is an elite defender at SS...though, he doesn't have the arm strength that Adames has. So two plus SS's. Play the one with the bigger arm at 3B, the young prospect who's your future SS at SS. And the guy who's beter at 2B than at 3B at...2B. Not sure this is the "most obvious thing," personally.

Again, who cares if the Brewers are talking about it? The OP posed a question(and the Brewers don't run this stuff by us). This whole message board concept, it's to debate hypotheticals. Second, if Turang comes up and hits .270/.350/.400, then are we allowed to talk about this suggestion? This being "sure" a guy can hit MLB pitching...you're never SURE until they actually do. We're likely giving Turang the 2B job, right? So we seem sure enough. So what is the problem then? Adames might forget how to play 30 feet to his left?

I REALLY doubt get why this is met with such resistance. It makes a ton of sense. With the shift, the 3B is going to have to cover more ground this year, the SS is going to have to line up-up the middle. You'll ALSO need an athletic 2B, but Urias profiles best there. The best defensive makeup to me is Adames at 3B, Turang at SS, Urias at 2B. So what's the problem? Adames will lose value? This suggests MLB teams are stupid. Adames would still play SS, teams aren't going to just forget in a year that he can play SS. If anything, his value goes up having shown the ability to play both positions. I wouldn't do it for Turang or helping him with his bat. I don't think that'll matter much. I'd do it because I think it'd make our defense better and give us a better chance to win and it makes sense. Finally, what difference does it make if there's been any talk from the Brewers or Adames about this? That's not something they'd likely share publicly, but moreover, it's a suggestion on a forum being put forward. This gets chalked up to the "Player X must not be good if X team didn't want him," type of logic. The question is does it make sense, not should we start a petition to get the Brewers to shift Adames over, just would that make sense. The answer is obviously...YES. He's got a huge arm, and you can more from him and Turang on the left side rather than Urias or Brosseau at 3B on a regular basis(though, there would be games where you'd start Brosseau at 3B with Adames and Urias at 2B vs good lefties).

Gotta come up with something for my Sister who's having her first. I was thinking about some...baby stuff, one of the items being this really nice jogging stroller. I'm pretty sure I can pull that off. From a Brother? She just ran a 5K 3 months pregnant in about 26 minutes. So she's pretty into it and she is a little high strung when she's not active. So...I bought one of them. Got it on Cyber Monday and checked out the reviews. But I'm wondering if I wait and make that just a baby shower gift and get her something more for her now? I could MAYBE spring for like a 2 day spa resort get-away? OR...do how about for a gift I start a College Fund? Not buying anything for my GF, we've agreed...spent a lot of money on our house. She got a new(used) car last summer. My old man is a simple guy. I've been buying him Dewalt tools. He's getting a a chainsaw with a 15 foot extension on it. But he's got pretty much everything else a reasonable person could need. So that's about it. This is kinda my Sister's Christmas.

I think that's the plan. Doubs has a lot of upside...it's just kinda overshadowed by Watson and his explosion. I wonder if this team would actually go back to the WRer well in this upcoming draft? Imagine getting another 6'4 4.3 40 WRer who breaks a ton of tackles and is compared to a Deebo Samuel's with the body of a pterodactyl! Watson/Johnston/Doubs/Toure/Lazard And then...they trade Rodgers for a 1st round pick to the Titans(the team with lots of talent and a HC who'd be willing to...cut off his manhood to win a SB), draft Broderick Jones, use their 3rd round pick....because...what the hell else are we gonna do with it but waste a roster spot, then trade back into the 1st round again and draft Gervon Dexter. Detroit is already looking like they're building a powerhouse and they should have a top 5 and top 10 pick(Again). They'll have a whole lot of cap room. Chicago looks like they might have found their QB and they'll have 125M in salary cap space. Minnesota....well, they're just good right now. Packers are in danger of swapping spots with Det or Chicago if they're not more proactive this off-season. The SB window has probably passed(though, not definitely based on the massive jumps teams have made in the last few years). But we've got a really nice group of young players. It'd be nice to know if Love is one of them. It'd be even nicer to know this year.

Yeah, it sounds like he's still trying to figure it out. I'm still thinking he coaches in the state next year...just not sure if that's at Wisconsin. https://247sports.com/college/wisconsin/LongFormArticle/Jim-Leonhard-Still-Undecided-On-Future-With-Wisconsin-Badgers-Per-Luke-Fickell-Head-Coach-199578157/

Yeah, I got that, I just didn't understand why you worded it like that. "Just gotta finish top 2," sounds like it's more about draft pick compensation to me, but...ok. Cleveland should be getting one for Kwan, an top prospect who probably makes top 100 lists if he's drafted higher as he produced all the way through the minors.

And in '17/18 the Brewers had an offer on the table for Darvish that was bigger than the one for Cain. I don't know why these deals are so surprising. Turner got 27 AAV. So he took the longer deal with the lower AAV from a team that just lost in the WS. That really doesn't seem crazy to me. There are people arguing he hurt Correa, Swanson and Boegart's by taking "just" 27 a year. I'm sure he could have gotten 35M a year over 5-6 years. Is that really that much better? He'll obviously lose value as he loses his speed, but he's still a good hitter, these deals always look like they're going to be bad the final few years...no matter who it is, Pujols, Carbrera...this is just part of being arguably the top position player on the market(outside of Judge). Judge is almost certainly going to get a deal that's stupid the final few years as well...or he gets the shorter 6 year 240M type deal. Once you get past the top tier and the impatient teams, things settle down and get a bit more reasonable(just a BIT more).

There's a few points on here I don't get. "Just gotta finish top 2?" I think it's top 3 for an eligible player. And I don't think Frelick playing over 100 games means he started the season on the active roster. Just as likely means he...became the starter and then the everyday player once they gained an extra year. You're really limiting the ROY list by only counting the guys finished 2nd. I mean...there's a wide range of games he could play without being on the OD roster. Could play 113 as Braun did after being a Super 2, could play 134 after gaining the extra year like Bryan Reynolds did...

Sure...that's another good point. That's why I just don't see the it's either opening day or the trade deadline for Frelick. I don't think we can afford to really play around. We're putting so many chips in the Burnes/Woodruff/Adames basket, you can't go most of the season without what very well could be our best hitter in terms of BA and OBP(*COULD be).

Agreed. Ortiz was an all-time great post-season performer, but it took a decade to get Edgar into the HOF...and Ortiz was a no-brainer? Yup. Put the best from that era in. I'd probably want to leave Sosa out of it, but then you get into the whole being too subjective about it. Steroids was implicitly allowed. I'll disagree how much Selig was complicit, but owners, the MLBPA, they didn't care. There's a term that I can't remember...it's on the top of my head, but I can't come up with it, but we use it in all area's. We measure people by today's standards. Not to get political(this shouldn't be too controversial...I hope) but we need to look at how people were using the standards of their era. Clemens, Bonds? C'mon... Where it might start to get a bit tricky would be Arod. He kinda kept going after we all agreed steroid use was not acceptable.

There was a time when I thought Rose should get back into Baseball and the HOF...I don't know if it was him being a clown or why my opinion changed...but it was probably him being a clown. Also, slightly overrated. The second one gets me triggered! Or I guess as close to "triggered" as anything does. I don't even know if Cobb was a bad guy. It SOUNDS like he was actually a good dude. Family was forced to move for being abolitionists earlier, he was an advocate of integrating. Was friends with Jackie, got to know him personally I believe. The story about him beating a black bellhop to death was apparently a teammate punching a white bellhop(not to death). The stories by the old drunk who just made a bunch of stuff up REALLY skewed the perception of Cobb.

This makes very little sense to me. It's one thing to keep a guy down for a couple weeks to gain an extra year of service time. It's another to keep a guy down who projects to be one of your best players for the first 5 months just in case he fits into what at the moment is a poorly designed incentive for draft picks. You have to be willing to bet on him winning a ROY award(or top 3 finish) in order to be willing to forgo the extra year. So why does that translate to the trade deadline? Carroll, Walker, Alvarez, Cavilli, Perez, Painter, there are a LOT of extremely talented rookies. They could also start him on the OD roster, see how he's playing. I don't think it's either OD or after the trade deadline though. That feels...hyperbolic.

I'd actually thought about Grossman, but didn't think that'd be well received. I love the idea of Contreras, it'd take a massive commitment by the Brewers...and he'd have to want to come here. If we offered 3/60 with a mutual option for 25M/10M buyout...I wonder if that gets it done? Or would you pretty much have to make it 4 years either way? I suspect not at he was reportedly looking at 5/100. But if you're going for one year with Burnes, Woodruff and Adames...then kinda clear up the veterans and flip them for prospects, it MIGHT be worth it. Also, entirely possible that if you gave Contreras that deal, you'd be able to trade him 2 years into it without having to eat too much of it given the lack of catching around MLB. Though that's the same reason it's unlikely he lands in Milwaukee to begin with.

I strongly disagree. Gambling on your own team didn't become swept under the rug, steriod use did...and while I don't condone Bonds use, I understand it. He's the best player of his generation, but he's watching Sammy Sosa average 60 HRs over nearly 6 years while all these other guys are putting up eye popping numbers...and he get frustrated, he takes the same substances that reportedly 75% of the league was on, puts up the most ridiculous numbers in the modern era(you could almost add up two of our best hitters and they'd barely beat his '04 OPS and OBP it was that ridiculous at 1.422 and .609 OBP). He just started taking roids, then should have won an MVP and then rolled to 4 more. The guy had two HOF careers. And I get he was not likeable, but a lot of players weren't. I am curious though, why do you draw that line with Bonds and Rose and not...Clemens or others who've gotten in while being known steroid users?

Disregard. I need to read the thread all the way through before commenting.

I still wouldn't be surprised if he hangs around until the NFL starts hiring and then changes his mind. He wouldn't be leaving Cincy high and dry and at THIS point it feels like he's trying to help get UW through this, keep players and recruits there as he is one incredibly loyal solider. But if he's the Co-DC and the GB Packers offer him the DC job a 2nd time? A job that he previously said was the ONLY job he'd leave being the DC at UW for? And since that period of time, the HC who he was working under was fired, he took over, then was not given the full time job despite, I'm sure in his mind having earned it... It'd be a very different situation and I think it probably is awkward and also not the best use of resources to spend money on two DCs. Assistant salaries are a big concern. But first, the Packers need to do the obvious(Fire Barry's ass) and then go back through the process and perhaps Leonhard isn't their top choice anymore. Seems like he really should be given how damn good he is with versatile LBers(like Quay and Campbell), penetrating big men(like Clark and Wyatt) and how his scheme really calls for the secondary to cover just long enough for front to get home. I just LOVE some of the stunts he runs where he'll have a couple of backers stunt or he'll have Benton come all the way across from the 3 tech and then come around the edge on the other side and they don't give anything away. Imagine instead of Quay just rushing from his off-ball position, they lineup he and Campbell in the A Gaps(like Zimmer used to do) and instead of both pealing off, you get Walker matched up on a Guard and Wyatt with his 4.7 speed loops around behind Clark? It's simple, but it also needs to be done so you don't give it away pre-snap or it's too easy to pass off. And then you just need Jaire/Stokes/Campbell/Savage/Amos(?) or whoever to hold up for a LOT shorter period of time. THAT'S the type of aggressiveness that will lead to guys like Douglas and Jaire getting a lot more turnovers.

They really don't though. That 3-3-5 is...a matter of semantics. All the additional size they had, they had a 285 DE, a 255LB DE and then do you call the "Big Nickel" a safety or is it a LBer? The Badgers had Leo Chenel as a 252LB MLBer/OLBer along with Sandborn a 240LB MLBer, Benton as a 315LB DT, Matt Hennisen a ~280 DE and Mullins who was a ~300 LB DE with Noah Burks and Herbig who were ~235 and...whatever Herbig is. So the only real difference here would be when Chenel would play OLBer and they'd bring in another safety like Ferguson or last year it was Torchio. There's this idea that Cincy had more size up front that...is based on the recollection of a couple games in which the Badgers were just manhandled, namely by OSU, it's really just not there. The REAL difference...is Sauce Gardner, the 4th overall pick and Kobe Bryant(4th Rd) who could cover most teams top WRers in man coverage allowing you to come up and crowd the LOS. Then the safety group, Bryan Cooks(2nd rd) Arquan Bush(2023 draft), Ja'Von Hicks(2023 draft) It's pretty much the same personnel groupings but if you can match the top WRers with one of the top CB/S groups, you can afford to keep more guys down in the box. 5 of the Bearcats DBs in that draft will end up drafted in the NFL. The Badgers have that type of talent? Of course not...so they take out a DL at times and add a DB to protect the backend. It's a distinction without a difference and one that's really only made if Leonhard needed to. Give him elite CBs and Safeties and I promise, he'd rather have 3 big DL who can rush the passer in there. And we have often in the past. If Fickell and Tressel can bring over more of their DBs or if we can just recruit better cover corners, Leonhard's scheme which has led to one of the best D's in the Country will be that much better.

So if they'd have gone Correa(same price) and then deGrom for 3/130, you'd be more on board? That make sense, if for no other reason than Correa's transition to 3B seems like it'll be a natural one, he's played in Texas, less injury prone and I think he's just a better player right now. Maybe they moved off Seager because Correa wouldn't take the same overestimating his market. I did not realize Seager was still just 28 this year, but I do think that's likely to be a bad deal for the last 5 years. Siemen had a great 1st year(led the league in OAA I believe). Not quite as good offensively, but a 6 WAR season.

Fair enough...but maybe deGrom doesn't agree to the deferred money in that case. As of now, he'll make 3/110 over the first 3 years, but 40.5 will be deferred. So it's really 3/69.5 for right now. Now given he could have gotten more money and the deferred money doesn't start until the 2035 we all know the value of that is 40.5 million is worth quite a bit less due to inflation. The way this is structured, I see the logic behind the Rangers agreeing to 5 years 185 over the ~3/130 that would have been less likely to get that money deferred. And there absolutely is the risk of an injury with pitchers, particularly power pitchers like deGrom...who'd actually been pretty healthy up until half way through 2021 when he was having a historically great season. And if, by chance, he is one of those pitchers, due to his outstanding velocity and just pure stuff, who is dominant when they're in their late 30s, you get him for 20M in Yr 6 with no buyout. Again, I get the skepticism, I just am surprised at how much everyone is in agreement with it. It's a big risk/reward type move, but the reward is you get an all-time great at a time when age seems to matter less for the best pitchers than ever before. The risk is really the deferred money in ~15 years. I am really just surprised deGrom didn't give the Mets the chance to counter.

They usually play the 162 games over 186 days I believe. 171 days or fewer is less than 1 year of service time. So a couple weeks. Or you send them down for a couple weeks at some point(which can be tough with a guy like Frelick if he starts out hot).

That's fair...I guess if you were going to go shorter, you're going 3 years and likely matching Scherzer's 43.5. AT that point, 2 more years, 50 million, most of which is deferred and then you get a team option? The Rangers DESPERATELY needed that anchor and they clearly want those dominant power righties since their system is stocked with them. I know we're not looking to trade Burnes...but man, this could be a good time to squeeze them. Lieter, Jung and say...Roby, a guy the Brewers apparently coveted due to his high spin rates? NOW the Rangers get two aces to go with Perez and Gray and a pretty loaded offense, the Brewers get a couple pitchers with high ceilings and a 3B? Eh, not really the place, but it does seem like a rational next move if you're going to go all in on this team right now. That'd be one helluva 2 year window.