BrewerFan

Sure...the reports look interesting. I also like Whitlock and a few other arms they have. Not enough to be significant pieces in a Burnes trade though. Whitlock just feels like the type of guy the Brewers could work wonders with.

An easy way to understand WHY "any Brewer fan would want to ink a pitcher over 30 yrs to any sort of longterm deal," was directly in my post. Also, not sure I consider 3 years a "long term deal," but also don't care enough to get into the weeds on that; There's an idea. You don't have to agree...but you can't say you have no idea why.

Absolutely no way am I giving Peralta a 5/125 extension 3 years out and with him throwing over 144IP once and it being last year. I also really doubt Woodruff signs that deal with multiple team options and then 40M deferred over 20 years. You really do love the deferred money and the "Fully Bobby Bonilla," concept though.

Ethan Small, Knoth, Misiorowski, they just traded Hader and the top prospect they got in return was a pitching prospect in Gasser. Every team tries to stockpile arms. The Brewers aren't unique in that. I don't think the top-paid prospects on the international market are often pitchers. If they are for another team...I don't know, but I'd agree in that one area the Brewers take a quantity-over quality approach as they're 15 year old kids and that's quite a bit further away than even a Prep arm and now 5-6 years behind a College pitcher... I don't think that's the case in any other aspect of player acquisition. I agree with this. It is a pithy acronym, but obviously untrue. If you go back through the years and look at the top 100 prospect list, there are a lot of prospects of all types who don't hit. I'd guess it wouldn't be all that much higher when looking at corner IFers with high K rates who hit for power. They likely also have a lot of variation per season. That doesn't seem like a good reason not to acquire those types of bats. Wasn't a good reason to not invest in Wilken.

I'm breathing just fine. Really? That's all you're saying? That's strange, because it seems like this ENTIRE thread has been about you complaining about them signing Chourio...and using the argument that they DIDN'T call him up as a strong point as to why they shouldn't have. I included Misiorowski as an extreme and kinda ridiculous example and he's one of the players you actually wanted up? Do you really think having him as the MAYBE 5th best reliever is better than developing him as a starting pitcher? And then when he's 25 and leaving, you're complaining about him leaving. Seriously? The Karate kid? LOL...alright...

They really haven't though. The Mets started last year with a 344M opening day payroll. The Dodgers went out and signed Ohtani to a massive deal, but this seismic shift really hasn't taken place. It didn't any more than when Arod signed a massive deal or he was traded to the Yanks or the Dodgers a few years ago were spending a ton of money. Big market teams throw around money. They haven't changed the rules or really even changed the games, just reminded those who somehow forgot about the financial realities(Which really should happen every year....when Cole gets 300M+ or a couple of 40-year-olds get 43M on multi-year deals). I do agree the Brewers should pick a lane and signing aging vets on the downside makes little sense if you trade Burnes and Adames...and Williams. I've argued for a while now Williams+Burnes makes a package for teams like Philly or others where we may be able to pry away a higher-tier arm we otherwise wouldn't.

He hit 3rd for the Brewers in December? The hell? There was a whole other season during the Winter Meetings and I missed it? Damn... 82M. Not over 100M. And he's 19, Winker got 2 ABs. The real madness is that you're still complaining about an extension that was universally regarded as an exceptional deal for the Brewers. False. You've made this false dichatomy between Chourio and Winker. One is a 5-tool CFer who's 19 years old, the other was a former AS who was terrible with the Brewers last year...which is why he got just 2ABs in the post-season. This naivete where you just ignore service time, particularly as a small market team, I get having to explain it to someone who's not a fan, but...you don't get this? By your logic, you'd have Misiorowski in the BP, Black at 1B, Gasser would have been up...just in the event they needed a long man who was a lefty(he was probably one of the 12 best pitchers). The year prior Wiemer, Frelick, they were both at least marginally better than Johnny Davis...could have been defensive replacements. Or we exhibit a bit of common sense and realize that the Brewers can aim to achieve two things simultaneously. 1-Win games 2-Develop players When the impact is marginal at best, it's probably not a good idea to sacrifice the latter. It's pretty straight forward. Throwing a 19-year-old prospect into a playoff race vs giving him another off-season to build up and get ready for the start of the season...while maintaining leverage in negotiations. I don't get how any of this is surprising.

This is your mind inside of the Brewers FO I gather? It's actually pretty obvious the Brewers were concerned about service time with no contract in place. And I doubt they'd "GLADLY paid the extra," for another late-season bat. The "extra," for 2 months of just major league average production at that point would have added a significant amount to the deal. I really don't believe you need Arnold to say they're concerned about service time with their prospects. It feels WAY too obvious.

Vanguard...it's owned by the investors, they aren't taking a pct, they take a flat fee(1500 a year, but you need to have a min of 500K in there **For a personal financial planner, not to open up any account there). That'd be my advice as I've been very happy with them. They go over every detail with you. The questions you should ask? I have a feeling you know, but are they fiduciary, how do they make money or what % do they take. What are their returns over the past 15 years. Probably nothing you wouldn't already ask. Maybe someone else can add something more insightful on that end, but Vanguard is something I'd strongly recommend.

I don't know about the Jaire thing. The MJS just reported that the decision on keeping him or not may come down to the 8M roster bonus he has coming up. Maybe that's a bluff. It seems outrageous to me that they'd cut him. Trading him would make a lot of sense, but are you getting a 1st? I'd certainly trade him if you could get a pick in the top half of the 1st, but given the injuries, that may be a big ask(coming off last year, I think he'd have been worth a 1st+a a couple of later picks). We're completely in agreement on JL. He's the ideal fit. With regard to the players, Slaton is more of a NT, but teams that run the 4-3 still have big, physical space-eaters out there. Damon Harrison played in a 4-3 for much of his career. LVN seems to like to play with his hand on the ground more than standing up. Gary is a guy I think is going to be great no matter where he plays. I also prefer the 34, but I don't want to see the Packers eliminating DCs because they run more of a 43. And really, any DC should be able to run both and get the most out of their players. But, hypothetically, if Saleh is available as a DC this upcoming off-season, you're not gonna pass on him because he likes a 4-3, right? I'm just using him as an example, I do not expect the Jets to fire him. They'd be crazy to do so.

I did as well. I'd gladly give Woody a 3-year deal in the 45M range with incentives. I'm confident enough in the teams' ability to rehab arms/shoulders and in Woody's work ethic and previous durability that I'd feel comfortable there. It'd be a big risk, but it's tough to get top of the rotation-type arms. The argument that it won't happen because...it didn't happen....it doesn't make sense to me. Also, we didn't waive him, we non-tendered him. That's a pretty big distinction. I think it's unlikely to happen, but of all the hypotheticals that have been thrown out, this seems like the most likely.

Yes...he's also had bad games vs terrible QBs and like every year a couple of games the D really played well, but that last part should be abundantly clear. I could understand why he was bad in Detroit and Washington. Preston Smith was his best player on the later team and he didn't have a whole lot in Detroit(I did not know his father-in-law was Rod Marinelli). Nobody that I can remember(maybe Suh was there...IDR). But there is talent in GB on that side of the ball. IF they can bring in someone who the players respect, I think you'd see this defense turn around very quickly. I prefer a 34 defense, but I don't really care at this point. It's really not that big of a deal...and a 4-3 where the DL can play a 1 gap scheme and get up-field may work better. I just hope we haven't done irreparable damage to the development of some of the young guys or a guy like Jaire. He's an elite talent and I really don't want to see him go. I'm still a big Jim Leonhard fan, but Minter from Michigan looked pretty good. Zimmer, such a wide range of candidates who are ALL just leagues better than Barry.

I meant what I said. I first used total revenue and then said the income a sport generates. And salaries are tied to that in professional sports. I'm really not even sure how that's in question. That MLB has fallen behind the other sports and is "only" at ~44% while the other sports have a set number that's closer to 49% has been a point of contention with the union fighting for a floor, but it absolutely is tied to it total revenue. Very specifically tailored to be tied to revenue generated. The entertainment sector? Ok, so they're not an outlier when compared to the entertainment sector, but you're still using overall inflation? I don't know(or believe) that's true with regard to the entertainment sector...but more importantly, I don't care. This was about sports as compared to general inflation.

NO, you're absolutely right. Player salaries have NEEEEVER been tied to the income a sport generates and professional sprots are not an outlier in economics at ALL! I am definitely the one who...-insert lazy 'tell me you know nothing without telling me- line here...🤣

We had a lot of success with Burnes leading our rotation...yet when someone proposed the idea of trading Yelich and using that money to sign Burnes(in another hypothetical) you flatly dismissed it by saying "ain't happening, Burnes said he priced himself out of Milwaukee." Not sure who suggested it, but it made a lot more sense than going and bringing back Hader at this point. What Burnes actually said was something along the lines of he's unlikely to sign an extension this close to free agency. But a reliever who's a current FA vs a SPer who's currently on our roster, you dismiss the possibility of signing the starter, but leave the door open to signing the reliever? The chances are exceedingly slim we sign either, it's just an odd contradiction there.

LOL...the overreactionary responses are a little funny to me. This was Fickell's first year, he's got a good recruiting class, his players coming in and we're already talking about how they'll NEVER get back to a B1G Title game, Fickell(the guy who went to the playoffs at Cincy, he may not be the answer... I think the playcalling is being a bit over-analyzed a bit as well. We played aggressively. If Allen is in there, or if it's the regular season, run it a bit more, but this is more of an exhibition game for teams to trot out the young guys who have stood out and give them some run. I thought they played well. They showed an explosive passing game, they have some players who should take a jump next year...but I'm really looking toward '25. You have to have some patience with a new HC looking to change a program. And we have Van-Dyke coming in along with a very talented young QB from Texas. Van Dyke was in some first rd mocks coming into this year. We have talented RBs, some exciting young WR, and some DBs. Positions we normally don't thrive at. Would have liked to have won...I don't see this as a huge harbinger of things to come, or doom on the horizon. If anything, I thought it was encouraging.

Player income is always tied to the revenue generated by the league(at least in the modern era). The dollar value from 1990 to 2023 does not compare salaries from today to 1990. If you were talking about a Principal, a skilled laborer, or virtually any other industry, it'd make sense. Not professional sports though. So I don't really understand why you'd use that standard for inflation. It's not really relevant.

I remember once seeing the Brewers payroll atop the league at ~19M a year(something like that). But they're inexact and that was years ago and probably inaccurate. BUT, to the larger point, Selig was a great owner, but he was more than that. There are no Milwaukee Brewers without Bud, the financial landscape is even more imbalanced without Selig as the Commissioner. He did an awful lot for the city of Milwaukee. Based on what? Normal inflation numbers, WAR per season from that period? Because MLB's total revenue was under 600M in 1990 and just under 11B in 2023.

Yeah, agreed. Also...I don't agree. Of course you can "grieve" the loss of a playoff series, a season. You only get so many of them, then but so many real chances in the post-season...so it sucks when you lose. That's what we're grieving. It's rough. I still wouldn't trade my "pasture" for anyone else's.

Clark is having a great year. He's not going anywhere. He's more likely to get a 2-3 year extension. But if not, he's got 13M in dead cap in '25. But I think Jones will take a ~5M cut on his base salary which is...IIRC around 11M. Campbell and Preston Smith will likely be cut/traded. We'd still have ~43M in cap space IF the cap only goes up the minimum amount. You still have to set aside quite a bit of money in there for the regular season, for draft picks, other smaller signings, but when you look at the cap after that, you've got ~35M from Bakh/Clark that will be off the books the following year when you'd have almost a completely clean cap. That's before you get to Jaire. He could cost you 3M to move off of next year vs the cap, but now you're saving 25M on the '25 cap. I'm skeptical they'd do that unless they got a 1st for him, but who knows how that'll play out. How he responds and plays next week and hopefully the following will help. Plus, safeties don't get paid in FA like other positions. Bates and Simmons, two of the best safeties and biggest deals got deals in the 4/60M range. They could get that yr 1 cap hit down to 10M(lower if they wanted). I think they could pretty easily sign a guy like Baker/Winfield and their future cap situation would be really healthy at this point. Should be kept in mind, Love will probably get an extension in the off-season, but still, plenty of room if they wanted to make a big FA signing...or two. I still really like Connor Williams from Miami as a Center. Great fit, nice upgrade(though Myers has been playing much better).

That is wild. I think I put something like this on my pre-season prediction, but...A-I probably didn't believe it and B-That was with Bakh, a lock down LT, an elite RT, and a just really good OL for the whole season. And I'm sure I'd have also included Watson staying healthy and Jones and the WRers/TEs for the most part. That hasn't been the case obviously. Obviously, nobody saying he's as good or better than 12, but he's matched his level of play through season 1 with a lot more obstacles. That is extremely exciting!

No, he's not returning with his contract expiring and the comments both players and MLF have made. They've had a few game plans this year where they drastically change the way they play. Tonight they dropped Kenny Clark and brought Nixon on a Corner blitz, he had Ballentine in man coverage vs Jefferson. Not to say the later is a good thing, it's just a different look so they could create more pressure. As I say this, the woman on TJM4 says, "We've gotta give Joe Barry his flowers." LOL...no, we do not. This should be the exception with this much talent on D, not the outliers.

I believe we had the highest payroll in MLB one year. Yount was made the highest-paid player as well...IIRC.

I'm talking about the '78-84 teams. The WS teams...the teams that would have made the playoffs 5 straight years in the current model(even before the last expanded WC team). Right. It's kinda hard to argue against Yount, Molitor, Coop, Oglive, Thomas, Fingers, Vook, Sutton, Simmons...just a stacked team. It's a great era to be a Brewers fan NOW though. That's the larger point...and I completely agree with that. Would it'd be nice if Cohen bought the team? Sure...but again, the structure and the organization are all headed in the right direction.

Yeah, it's kinda hard to compare it to the first 18 years as an expansion team to a WS team. Yount, Molly, Coop. That's probably the golden era for many, but Attanasio has kept the Brewers in Milwaukee, the future is bright with regard to the stadium, the players, the farm system. We have the right people leading it and hopefully an Acuna Jr type talent coming up.