BrewerFan

I didn't say Misiorowski doesn't fit 'my' projection as a TOR-type arm, he clearly does. I'm saying he's the only one and there's a lot of risk associated with him, his delivery. That, and he's the only pitcher in our system who projects to be a true ace- IF everything clicks for him. But again, he's got 73IP and he's still raw. That doesn't mean he doesn't have TOR-type talent, it means you're banking on a lot to try and put together an elite starting rotation. Ultimately, I would just prefer we target talented arms with big velo, spin rates and let the Brewers work with them. It doesn't have to be a guy like Painter, I trust the Brewers to find guys who fit their criteria and make the right move. I would be happy if we got Mayo and a couple of prospects. I'd just be happier if we got a couple of pitchers who have high upsides(even if they may be a bit further away).

That's kinda what the Packers moved away from when they had Ed Donatell and Bob Sanders and a few others maybe inbetween. And they got that. Played a lot of softer coverage, used their DEs to get pressure(Kampman and KGB, others around then like Holliday and whoever else) and they lived on turnovers. The 34 was in part because Capers was available. A former HC with a great record as a defensive coach...and it was more aggressive. And that worked with the CBs we had. Woodson, Harris, Williams, Shields, etc... That's the type of hire I'm talking about though. A coach who can take some off MLF's plate and someone who has the respect of the players. Really would like to see Florres if we don't get our first pick in Leonhard. Pro-Bowlers? Clark or Gary would work. Tom has been REALLY good. Love is worthy(again, so much voting was done this year earlier in the season before Love looked this good, so I get that. Playoffs, Pro Bowl, this season has been all about Love...and a resounding success as far as that goes.

McCarthy from Michigan looks like he could be a really nice NFL QB, but Minnesota needs to tear it down and rebuild. Use Jefferson to pick up 2 1sts and start from there. I'd keep the OTs in place, but otherwise, gut it. I'm hoping the Packers actually trade up in this draft. If they find a Safety in FA, they have relatively few needs outside the OL. I don't think it'll happen, but if Alt is there at 8-10? It'd be worth it. "Saleh's defense." Man, that'd be incredible. Maybe Arod will want his buddy Getsy back with Hackett running the show! Hell, lets just do them a favor. We'll swap 1sts and they get Bakh(and he'll play another 4 healthy years in NY on the turf).

That's a little wild. I do not remember it like that. I remember a great 1st start and then I thought he flirted with a no-hitter, a CG, but I would have guessed his ERA would have been well over 4 and that he had ~50IP. I was a big Coulter fan. I knew it was an uphill climb for him, but I thought he had a lot of upside. @reillymcshanegreat trip down memory lane...

Williams and Maye do seem like they're on another level...and I think the Bears can get more for this 1st than last year. Bryce Young and CJ Stroud were not the prospects these two QBs are. What may mitigate the compensation is if they "only" drop-down to ~3-5 range and they can still take a guy like MJH, Alt or Fashanu, a franchise LT. I hope they stick with Fields and pay him...but it seems unlikely. I think the top of this draft is going to be multiple All-Pro's and HOF-type talents. The Bears have missed at QB regularly, but it was a smart decision by them and AZ to move down last year and end up with multiple 1sts this year.

You're right, salary cap or not, they won't charge less for tickets. The issue is the Brewers do not and cannot generate NEARLY the same revenue as teams like the Yankees, Dodgers, Mets, etc...just as the Packers can't generate as much as the same markets in the NFL. Nothing WILL change, but it's hard for me to understand the argument that revenue sharing hasn't helped the NFL when...we saw it implemented, Baseball was the most popular sport(by a large margin) and the NFL has caught and then surged well past Baseball. And it's allowed the small market teams to be competitive and prohibited the large market teams from just buying the best players.

There was Fantasy Baseball well before Fantasy Football, same with Gambling. The sports being "boring," is subjective. It WAS objectively the most popular sport. Soccer is "boring" by these standards. It's the most popular sport in the world. I'm not sure why having your ace or the #1 seed losing(which happens in Football as well) would in any way be a knock against the sport, but ok. Well, I don't think that's true at all, but tell me how "balanced," it'd be if Dallas, New York and the large markets didn't share revenue? They'd just wait 4 or 5 years JUST like MLB and Aaron Rodgers would end up in Dallas or New York(in their prime, not as a FA). Same with every other team. The parity is a byproduct of revenue sharing, not who currently has a good QB. No revenue sharing, the QBs would all be in 4-5 markets. GB likely wouldn't have a team. That's a bizarre take. Like the issue of revenue sharing hadn't been broached until Ohtani signed? This is all about getting Ohtani to Milwaukee? It was an enormous part of Bud Selig's tenure as Commish...though there was only so much he could do.

That is a huge cost. I worked at an Insurance company after Grad school and it was soul-sucking and they were...pretty shady, but the long-term care and short-term care are really important. You can easily go through your retirement or what you were going to leave your kids OR worse yet, end up in a poorly run retirement home.

Strongly disagree as the NFL's revenue sharing in the 1960's is one of the MAIN reasons cited for why the NFL become such a popular product. It's not comparing "fruit baskets to vegetable gardens," it's comparing two professional sports leagues that each have a monopoly. One went with revenue sharing and its popularity exploded. The other did not and its popularity has waned. There are...dozens of articles that attribute MLB's revenue sharing directly to its popularity. https://www.espn.com/nfl/news/story?id=2781759 https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1574285-how-the-nfl-became-the-most-competitive-league-in-all-of-sports It's not comparing two totally unique entities, it's as close to a 1 for 1 comparison as you can get.

No, not more than Football. Again, all this is ignoring that MLB was king, they generated the most revenue. Then you had them collectively bargain their TV contracts. Now, every team has more than enough to cover the salary cap from one check on one day at the start of the league year before selling a ticket, a beer, a hot dog, anything else. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/09/08/the-worlds-50-most-valuable-sports-teams-2023/?sh=1e034f9f2b44 https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/washington-commanders-value-goes-up-in-2022-forbes-says/65-fc37925c-8014-4946-812b-c3ff590444f4#:~:text=The magazine just released its NFL team valuation,a 33% increase in value from last year. If we're talking about generating revenue, popularity absolutely equates to the quality of the product. And the NFL wasn't more popular than MLB. That's the point. It's become more popular. I'd rather own a team that's guaranteed to make money, be competitive, and is worth ~3X more than NFL teams are as compared to MLB teams. The average NFL team is worth ~4.5B. As the article above shows, even aggressive evaluations are below market value. An 111 BILLION dollar TV deal...not including the other 2-3 billion they earn for the red zone package. Give me the team that gets that divided up. Dude...MLB teams play on Saturday's, Sunday's, they play all the time when people are off work. They play roughly 10X the games. Ok...happy with their investment is vague. I thought this was about if it was 1-Good for the sport and 2-If MLB was maximizing it's revenue. We see all the Bally Sports going bankrupt and many teams have no idea what they're going to do in the future. Contrast that with the NFL and the large market owners who sacrificed a little and ended up with a MUCH bigger product(again, blowing past MLB, the National Pastime as a result). This is really simple. From which list would you rather own a team? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_list_of_the_most_valuable_NFL_teams https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes_list_of_the_most_valuable_MLB_clubs

I think it'd be a good idea if another burner falls to you in the 2nd/3rd. It's just such a night and day difference when Watson is on the field vs when he's not. All these mock drafts have wildly different rankings, but a guy like Franklin from Oregon would be a great fit. I wouldn't force it, but if he is there at 52 or wherever we pick 2nd in the 2nd rd, might be an idea. But it's certainly not a priority and this young group is really exciting. Just wish Toure was the guy they seemed to claim he was.

Ok, so the Packers in a city of 100,000 people are worth 4.25B and the Brewers are worth 1.6 and that's proving your point that they're "maximizing revenue and franchise value?" Even your very narrow example highlights my point. So again, 17 game schedule vs a 162 game schedule and the NFL dwarfs MLB. And you don't think their revenue sharing and the league's parity, the legitimate chance for every team to win, the Jets' inability to just pay more than every other franchise has nothing to do with that? https://nesn.com/bets/2023/07/you-wont-believe-how-much-more-revenue-the-nfl-rakes-in-over-mlb-nba-and-nhl/ You can directly tie the NFL's revenue sharing with its TV contracts to its blowing past MLB in revenue and becoming the more popular league.

No, that did not get included(or Chourio would likely not have signed).

Are they though? Why has a league that plays roughly 1/10th of the games generating far more revenue? Nearly twice the revenue...while growing at a far greater rate. Doesn't sound like they're maximizing their value. Seems like they'd probably do better if they collectively bargained their TV contracts like the NFL and the large market owners had the incredible foresight to do when they were not nearly as big as Baseball.

Sure, I could see the argument that Rodriguez may have the highest floor of any of these three, but the post is specifically about the Brewers next ace. Gasser was on top 100 lists at points last year, he's a lefty, a similar profile to Rodriguez(but he's a lefty). Neither have much more room to add velo, they each work in the low 90s, can tough ~95, they have one pitch that's plus, Gasser a slider, Rodriguez a CB. There's not much to separate the two right now. Both look like middle-of-the-rotation type pitchers. If Rodriguez can turn his Change into a more reliable plus pitch or if Gasser can improve his command and improve his cutter...maybe they end up as low-end #2s. So if everyone reaches their potential...I feel like this question answers itself. Misiorowski has concerns, but none of them are about his ceiling.

The defense should be higher than 10-15. This isn't like the 2010s. There's too much talent there(we're in that range right now). We should be in the top 10 pretty easily. Also, create more turnovers. The scheme, it's really not as big of a deal as people are suggesting. I think they're remembering the switch from the 43 to the 34. That was different. The 43 is easier for the front to play(no dropping) and the DL don't have to play 2 gaps. It's really a simpler scheme up front. You need 3 MLBers, but McDuffie could play as the 3rd LBer. This is just in the base. We're in nickel(everyone is) ~70% of the time. Base, maybe 20%. I'd like to see our front play more single gap. Get up-field instead of trying to hold your ground. But it's not like Aaron Kampman dropping or having Clay Matthews. And TJ Slaton, he still remains an invaluable piece in the 43. The slight adjustments pale in comparison to the risk of not getting the best candidate. Plus LVN and Gary, they actually played IDL in College. Gary almost exclusively. Smith in Washington was in a 43. My ideal off-season 1st-Talise Fuaga Monster RT out of Oregon St. Just a monster in the run game, athletic and good in the pass game, but rough around the edges. Tom moves to LT, our OTs are set. It's not Alt, but it's a helluva upgrade. 2nd(40) Barton(Duke) or Connor Bebbe(Kan St) OG Fix the OL in 2 moves. Barton can play C, OG or OT, but is best on the inside. Also, really good vs the run. Donovan Jackson is also an option. An Elgton Jenkins type. He's a powerful, athletic guard with 36 in" arms who could play OT, but is a road grader. 2(52)-Troy Franklin, Xavier Worthy WRs from Oregon/Texas. Deep threats. Our offense opens up so much with a deep threat. Protects against Watson and keeps the pipeline developing. 3(83) Bucky Irvin(RB Oregon) Probably goes a bit higher, but HR threat, can catch the ball out of the backfield. Perfect fit. 3(88) Cole Bishop(S Utah) 6'3 200. He can play FS, SS. Covers a lot of ground, he can come up and hit. 4(116)-Jaheim Bell(FB/RB/H-Back/TE/WR) He's a jack of all trades. He may be the most versatile offensive player and the ideal replacement for Deguara. Hasn't been asked to block much, but at 6'3 230 with elite speed, he's a matchup nightmare. 5-Supplemental pick for Lazard-Dillon Johnson(RB Washington) Another explosive back who can catch the ball. Stock could rise with the CFP, but right now graded as a 5/6 rd pick. 6-Zack Zinter(OG Mich) He was a 2/3 rd pick before the ACL injury. He's a monster inside. Most likely uses '24 as a RS type of year, but worth the pick IMO. two 6ths rd picks for Lowry and Reed -Jay Stanley(SS Southern Miss) Big, physical player. Can help on STs right away, but at 6'1 215, he can also play nickel LBer. -Elijah Jones(CB Boston College) 6'2 185 CB with good speed, and coverage ability. Probably needs to develop a bit more, but I like a developmental CB behind Jaire, Valentine, Stokes(who is probably not going to have his option picked up). 7th-Tyrice Knight(MLB UTEP) Under the radar, but he's 6'2 240, explosive and looks great on tape. Another STs first player to start, but he could end up in the rotation, particularly if Campbell is in fact cut). Free Agent Budda Baker 5/75 25 SB, 35 GTD against injury The OL gets a makeover on the OL. Tom kicks over to LT(where I think he'd have played this year if we'd have known Bakh wasn't going to play). Still a chance they bring Bakh back on an incentive-laden deal starting at the Veterans Minimum Benefit, but I wouldn't count on him. But with or without him, we add a big OT and a couple IOL prospects. The offense gets more playmakers to open the defense up. I think Jones is back after taking a pay cut from his ~11M base salary next year, but they need to get younger at RB. We have an exceptional young WR'ing core, but too much of our offense is predicated on the threat of the deep ball. Another speedster who can return kicks in place of Toure would be a big boost and insurance policy. And Jaheim Bell is an absolute matchup nightmare(I expect SF will draft him before us with their 3rd rd comp picks). The defense gets yet ANOTHER star, a physical safety next to Baker who can both cover ground. We're in outstanding cap space for the future. One more year where we have to clean the cap up a bit, eat the Bakh hit, Savage dead money, Nixon dead money(both voids). But we still end up with ~40M in cap space pretty easily. Clark gets a ~3/60 type extension...or you just let him play the year out and that 27M comes off. We'll have to sign Love. I'm guessing we're looking at 5/220 at this point, but QB salaries are stupid. But they'll do enough to mitigate the cap hits in the short term. Obviously, a WHOLE lot will change from now until the draft, this is just an outline of what I'd look at. OL #1 priority. It's been "good enough," as of late. Much of that is owed to that elite play of Tom, Josh Myers really turning it around and Jenkins returning to form. My backup signing would be Antoine Winfield, a guy who is physical like his father and can play the slot or play CF. Safety is also very deep this year in Free Agency, not so much in the draft. I'm not saying these moves make us a contender, but if Love and the young players in place right now continue to improve and we add a little more explosive playmakers, less pressure is on Watson and it'll open up the middle of the field for Kraft, Musgrave, Reed, Doubs, Wiccks and company. The real key is getting a veteran playmaker at safety and an upgrade at DC....regardless of what he runs. Someone who commands respect and who gets the most out of his players.

The 34 is more of the run-stopping defense(in theory...that was the reason it was created) and our DL wouldn't be undersized as 4-3 DEs. They'd be just fine. There's less you can do in a 43, but if Florres is out of a job, or a great DC who prefers a 43, I would be fine with it. In fact...I doubt there'd be many teams who'd have bigger DEs. Our personnel is versatile and more than ever, fits both styles. Gary, Van Ness, both bigger DEs in a 43 or as OLBers in a 3-4. Philly's DEs are tiny relatively speaking. SF has bigger DEs, but Bosa and Young are 6'5 and listed at 265 and 264 respectively. Their backups are 6'4 264 and then Gregory is 6'5 242. Gary is 6'5 277, Smith, 6'5 265, Van Ness at 6'5 272, Enagbare is the smallest at 6'4 258. Our best game plan this year was basically one in which Barry(or whoever actually came up with it) ran multiple fronts. So...whatever it takes, I don't care.

Exactly. That's why this article is a bit confusing. Where is Gasser? A lefty who strikes a lot of people out? He's got a similar ceiling to Rodriguez. But if the question is who's most likely to be the next ACE? It's Misiorowski and there's not a close 2nd at this time(well, Knoth I guess, but he's on a whole other timeline).

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.