BrewerFan

If he's healthy and can hit these projections...that'd be a great signing(for ~2M a year);

I'll take it. We're talking about Caratini as though he was a really good offensive hitter on top of his defense, but he also hit .199 with a .642 OPS in '22 and that was better than his '21 numbers...which were the two years he got the most ABs. If you can get Maldonado for 3.5M or so, I'm happy with that. He's been a terrible hitter the last 3 years, but I think there's a decent chance he can give you a ~.675 OPS in limited ABs as a backup and he's a very good defender. Good stopgap for Quero. It'd be even better if we could find someone in-house. And then there's always the consideration that the Brewers somehow turn offensive catchers into at least capable defensive catchers.

I've been impressed with Dame. He's never going to be Jrue(or even an average defender). But he's playing with effort, he's taking charges...which I'm not sure I'm a huge fan of at this point in the season, but he's also getting deflections, steals. When he starts shooting closer to his norms, you're not gonna need him to be Gary Payton on that side. You ARE going to need the team to be more cohesive, but they've been moving in that direction. I am having trouble seeing how they upgrade that defense given the Draconian rules regarding teams above the 2nd apron. I think it'd probably have to be a bigger trade and it'd involve Portis...which would be a slap in the face, but we are trying to win a Title. The trade rumor I've heard was Portis, Connaughton, Marjon and 2 2nds for Caruso and Kenrich Williams in a 3-team trade. Now you'd likely have Dame/Caruso/Middleton/Giannis/Lopez and then when Crowder is healthy a 2nd team of Payne/Jackson Jr/Williams/Crowder/R Lopez? I don't know if that's worth it or not, but you could improve your Defense quite a bit. That was just a made-up trade, but it feels about right. There'd be a tax to trade with the Bulls presumably and get an all-NBA perimeter defender. You'd be giving up on Beauchamp. I don't know if that makes you better or not. Portis isn't a great defender, but he's a high-energy player(and one who's taken a whole lot less to play in Milwaukee). Even that trade though, my understanding is you can't add multiple players in a trade when over that 2nd apron. So I don't even know if that trade would be legal.

Good for him. It's a little weird to me he couldn't find a job this year for a contender. Seattle would seem like a perfect place for him. He's lost some leg strength(not as much as has been suggested IMO, but some). But he's proven to be clutch, a good bad-weather kicker and he is pretty damn reliable beyond 50. Especially in big spots.

No, it was not. My "entire argument," was I think these type of early extensions are good and that Contreras should be someone we try to extend and that I don't think his brothers money would deter him from signing a deal similar to what Murphy signed(adjusted for the fact that Contreras is a year further away from FA). THAT is the argument I've made. And beyond that, I'm done as this is getting dumbed down to a Twitter-type level. @Brewcrew82 and I pointed out several differences between the likelihood Jackson Holliday(who AGAIN has already made ~9M himself, has Boras as an agent and a Father) and Jackson Chourio signing an extension and you somehow equated that with William Contreras. So I'm not sure what was a "strawman," or a "hypothetical," but sure. I don't care enough to keep going.

Ok...so you'll be upset if they trade for Soto! Why do you hate the Brewers? You're as bad as our cheap owner who hasn't even made an offer to Ohtani... (I trust that I don't need to put this in blue for you).

This year? That's pretty optimistic. I certainly hope you're right.

I am? I'm the one getting caught up in "degrees of it?" I made a statement about how I didn't think Contreras would turn down an 80M extension and you started this whole thing because we had a different opinion of Holliday and then turned it to your which would be MORE likely to sign, a player who didn't have a penny(which is neither) or a player who had a rich relative. That's literally you brings up irrelevant things and the degrees of how likely these hypothetical people would be. I'm done. This is stupid. You've already said "It's not even arguable," which basically a way of saying your point is so stupid, I don't see how you could argue it. And I tried to go with the "we just don't agree," and it gets more ridiculous and convoluted each time. But you're right. Because Willson Contreras signed a contract, William Contreras won't sign one because he can rely on his brothers money and that's...just how it is and it's crazy to suggest otherwise. WE good now? FFS.... Yeah, I'm not using your strawman as the basis for the entire argument. I'm not using "if one person is dirt poor and lives in an impoverished country vs another player who has a Brother, who is MORE likely in that scenario..." as that wasn't the question and is...as I said, a silly strawman argument. I said I don't think William Contreras would turn down a fair contract extension for ~80M because his brother has made money. Maybe(and this is a WILD thought) we just stick with THAT point rather than all these other absurd hypotheticals?

Yes, but you don't buy someone out twice, that's all. Anyway, we agree it benefits the Bucks MUCH more than Chourio. It was a huge contract for him.

I don't have a lot to add other than I've just always been a fan of all 3....not equally, probably as others have said, Brewers/Packers more equally and then the Bucks, but a very small gap. But to the bolded part, the Giannis impact has been HUGE. He has done so much for the City and even the perception of the Bucks in every way. I hope he gets another chip this year to put another stamp on his legacy(and then lets say 4-5 more after that...).

I don't think it's 4M total, I think it's 2M for each year. I don't think you could be forced to pay a buyout a year after you turned down a buyout. I could be wrong about that, but it doesn't make sense to me. Anyway, he got a signing bonus of 2M. If you add up his yearly contracts, those come out to 78. The 82M GTD would mean he has just 1 more buyout left, right? But in any event, 2M or 4M at this point is going to be pretty insignificant(it's not all that significant right now). To get the 2 more years of him from ages 28 and 29...that's worth 2M or 4M.

Now we're bringing Taylor Swift and her billion dollar ass into this? And yeah dude, I get how it's unfathomable to you that I couldn't possibly agree that you could just rely on your Brothers money(he does NOT have over 100M by the way given this thing in the states called TAXES, he probably has about 10M right now and will make another ~40M IF he's spent his money well). It's not even arguable though. So...I don't know, STOP arguing it then? If you don't get how making almost 9 million YOURSELF in a signing bonus, vs 10,000 in a signing bonus is a big difference, well, I don't know how you can't understand that. If you can't understand how it's different asking your PARENTS for help rather than your brother who's a few years older...I don't know how THAT is even arguable. THIS is it. This is how you changed the argument from William Contreras being less likely to because of his brother's money vs this strawman that if you were to judge between two hypothetical people...who'd be MORE likely to go year to year. I simply said I don't think his Brothers money would be a huge factor. Now we're measuring by degrees vs someone who hasn't got a penny to his name? And then the random "if I won the lottery." I tried going with we just don't agree, but this is ridiculous. Be honest in your hypothetical. BOTH players have "won the lottery." William, in this scenario, would be offered roughly the same as Wilson just got as a FA. Finally, AGAIN, if you can't even fathom how "this is arguable," then stop arguing I guess? I can't even see how it's arguable that you risk 80M dollars thinking, "hey, I can leech off my Brother if things go bad." But that's just me.

I'd actually guess it was the other way around. Those 2 years don't do a ton for Chourio. They're lose/lose for him. The Brewers gain 2 years of team control for a risk of just 2M dollars.

I'm getting that. I just don't agree with you. Relying on your parents vs your Brothers are two very different scenarios to me. And yes, if I won 150M I'd take care of my siblings...but that's not the same. I'd give them ~5M. I'd also tell them to cash their lottery ticket if they won the lottery as well.

None of them. Misiorowski has SUCH unique stuff and is so incredible, nobody is even remotely close. It's kinda like asking who could be this years Uribe. You need a guy with ELITE stuff to go from unranked to top ~30 prospect. Knoth IS the one guy who has a chance to move up into the top 60 or so as a pitching prospect. He also may not start the year in full-season ball, but ranking pitching prospects is so much more about stuff and projectability than it is with hitters. I don't think we should continue to expect guys to just fly up through the rankings just because we've had Chourio did it two years ago and then Quero and Misi do it last year...but particularly with a pitcher, you can look at obvious things like velo and movement/spin rates and make an educated guess Knoth could make the big jump. It's pretty unlikely anyone from the DSL will move that quickly as a pitcher, but it'd be great. I just don't see a lot of potential TOR arms in this system beyond those two. That's not a huge indictment of the system, they're loaded elsewhere and that could change quickly(particularly with a Burnes/Williams trade). I do like the young arms we have for the pen though. It seems like we'll be able to continue to stock the pen for Murphy. But a little work to do yet with the starters. Ashby's future will play a huge role.

That's a big factor. I think slighty exaggerated as he's had players sign extensions(I can only think of Altuve and Boegarts just did before opting out). But even if you set that aside, having made 9M as the 1st overall pick and his Dad making a LOT of money and advising him would make it unlikely he would either way. Now Holliday also has his own younger Brother who's a VERY highly regarded prospect, one who may be a better prospect than Jackson(probably hyperbole, but I've seen the argument). In Contreras' case, he's got at least one brother who's already not made it in the majors(I don't know if he has any others). Let's put it this way. Say Jaison Chourio is a top prospect and becomes the higher OBP, lower power version of Jackson. Do you think he'll be less inclined to sign an extension because Jackson did? That logic just doesn't make sense to me(I know it's not your argument). This is all probably moot as I don't think the Brewers are rushing to extend Contreras and, players decide to or not to sign irrespective of family money.

You don't know how it can even be argued that having a brother roughly your age making a lot of money is the same as you yourself making ~9M and being 19 years old and the #1 prospect with a FATHER who made nearly 200M during his career? What exactly do you expect of your siblings? My Sister and her Fiancé don't expect me to pay for them to raise their child. They didn't even expect a free place to live. They DID expect my parents to help them buy a house(as they'd helped me when I was younger). The relationship between a Brother and Father are wildly different. The best way for two brothers to NOT be close...is to count your brothers money and expect to use that as a fallback in case you make the wrong decision in your own career. I also don't think offering him a deal akin to Murphy, a decidedly superior player is really a huge risk.

This deal makes it SOO much more likely he's going to be in the opening-day lineup for several reasons. You're paying for Major League Service time anyway...so it's not like you can put him in the minors for 3 years and then you still have 10 years of him. Starting him in Milwaukee on opening day opens the door to getting a 1st rd draft pick in ROY compensation. With this deal, you don't have to wait 2 months to get that extra year, it's already in the contract. I also don't think you're rushing him at this point. He's proven himself. He spent a full year in AA last year and he was elite after they went back to the normal baseballs. You can certainly send him down if he struggles or whatever, but it'd be a little silly to not have him on the OD roster when you're literally encouraged to have players just like this...top 100 prospects who've hit in the upper levels...on OD rosters.

That was me(and I believe Brewcrew82) we were talking about Jackson Holliday and it was his FATHERS money, not his Brothers. And that was only half the equation, the other half was that he got an 8.2M dollar signing bonus last year. Your parents being wealthy at 19 years old while also having made a lot of money for yourself(more than Contreras has made thus far) versus your 31-year-old brother when you're 24 are two wildly different things. It's not at all the same. Yeah, they may pay for a vacation or they may do certain things for you(maybe even buy you a house)...but if you have the chance to make the SAME amount of money as him and be independently wealthy...you're most likely not going to pass that up because your brother has made money. It's entirely possible he'll choose to go year to year because he'll bet on himself, but I can't imagine he passes up a competitive deal because one of his brothers(he's got at least one other who didn't make it in MLB, so he has both examples to draw from) made it big.

Yeah, I've seen trending topics about conspiracies and the refs related to Gambling, but I refuse to even entertain that. It's ridiculous. Gambling is going to have to get SOOOO much bigger for the NFL to be willing to put a 20B a year industry at risk. The refs aren't full time and really aren't paid that well given the league's revenue and their importance. They're also losing important refs to the booth where they get paid more(that's probably a smaller number, but still good refs).

I did not know that...so I was only correct on accident😂 I guess it probably doesn't come up very often. I think they'll be fine with their roster construction. They're dropping a LOT of dead cap in '24 and or inflated salaries like Clark(who they may want to extend, but not at ~28M AAV). Dougas, Savage and Bakh already account for ~32M in dead cap. I'd assume Jones will take a pay cut from his 11M base, but he's still got ~12M in dead cap hit(6 or 7 in void years for '25). Nixon has ~2.6M in dead cap after this year. Preston Smith is probably next up. He's still a very good player and it's only a minimal savings next year, but moving off it is probably a good idea. Depending on the draft, Campbell may be another guy you want to move off despite not saving a lot. In both cases, you'd probably only do it if you could get a draft pick back. Otherwise, you're saving ~3M and paying them 12-13M to not play, but there's some incentive for teams to trade for them as each has low base salaries. But I think we're pretty close to being flush with cap space again...and that should line up juuust with Tom and the young guys that'll need to be paid. Ideally, you'll need to pay a whole lot of them. Whatever they do with the cap, whoever they sign(I'd like one Christian Wilkins in FA and one Joe Alt in the draft...and I'll get neither)...the Packer's future has gotten a whole lot brighter in just one month!

I don't think he's here trolling, I just don't think it's as balanced as he thinks it is. The PCA question is a very good one. How concerned are we about him? I think the kid looks like a stud, but you can certainly pick apart the same issues. But for me, the big thing is, Black was NEVER supposed to be a #4-5 type hitter. Maybe top end #3, more likely a #2 if he develops as expected. And there's really no reason he shouldn't hit 15-20. Especially playing half his games at Miller Park. Let's say though, for the sake of argument, he does "only" hit 10. If he's got a 65 bat, and he walks like he has, that's almost ideal for a #2 hitter. I don't think using Frelick or Turang helps his argument about Black or with regard to his bias or lack thereof. They were both rookies and we all compared Frelick to Kwann. Not a power threat.

Ok....I'm not arguing if his upside is 20 HRs or 10. I think the 18 HRs last year, his first full healthy year in the minors would suggest it's more than 10, but regardless...so what? You're presenting this argument as though his strongest tool was his power and now that's all thrown into question. That was NEVER his calling card, nor the reason he was a top 50 prospect. It was his bat-to-ball skills, his ~16% BB rate, his lower K rate, and his speed. He's not a Wilken-type prospect. Never was. And I find the Ruiz comparison absurdly disingenuous. That you're comparing his ability to get on base with that of Black shows a narrative you're trying to present rather than a subjective analysis.

I don't find 142 ABs in AAA where he progressively got better to be that compelling. Ahh...again, should have scrolled down instead of going straight to the notifications.

35.8% GB, 43.4% FB rate last year for Bellinger, 43.6% pull side. Black in AA last year(where he got most of his ABs); 37.0% GB 43.2% FB with 40.8% pull side(his pull side was actually higher in AAA at 41.7%). Not that I think anyone's expecting him to match Bellinger's power number of hit 47 HRs in ANY year, but you're taking 142 ABs...after a late-season promotion to AAA. So this just seems a bit silly. ANY hope for power from a guy who we don't expect a ton of power from(I think 15-20 is pretty reasonable) is pretty much gone because of a small sample size in AAA while ignoring AA? Just seems like a questionable narrative.