BrewerFan

I mean...high leverage relievers are never redundant, especially not when their top reliever is out for next year. They're a 100-win team with the most young talent in the league. You need a dominant Pen to win it usually. I'll gladly go Williams and Burnes for the right package.

I'm not minding this deal myself. For all the talk about Burnes no longer being viewed as an ace, and his return being smaller than anticipated, this should disabuse people of that notion.

I grew up a big FSU fan, so I'd like to see them in, but the committee's goal is to get the 4 best teams in. I don't believe most genuinely believe they are one of the best 4 teams at this point. As for OSU...I don't know if they have a much stronger case than the team that won the SEC beating a team that had won...what, 45 of it's last 46 and the last two NCs. But it's also not the same powerhouse SEC programs, so it's going to be interesting to see what they decide. It'll be hard to fault them if they go with FSU, 'Bama, Texas. It's a rare year where there isn't a truly dominant team. UGA has been #1 almost all year and they've lost a ton of talent the last couple years. 'Bama really came on with their QB, but they really should be out of it if Auburn didn't rush 2 on 4th and ~30 to win the game vs Auburn. There will be people upset no matter what direction they go. This would probably be the perfect year for 8 teams as I really think the top ~8 could win...save for FSU due to Jordan Travis.

They beat LSU as well as Duke and Louisville. So...three, but they beat the first couple with Travis at QB. They're a very different team without him. I think they're a very worthy team...IF they have Travis, but they don't. How does UGA stay in and 'Bama get knocked out?

Well...you got your dream, but I can't see FSU being one of the top 4 teams. Their offense is so bad. I also don't think the SEC is getting two in. I think it's a tough argument to get one in this year. Michigan and Washington are locks. UT should be I think...and then I would say 'Bama...but they're not all that impressive this year. Michigan appears to be the favorite, but this is going to be a year where none of the games are obvious locks. It should make for a more entertaining CFP.

The hell it wasn't. This was a huge topic of conversation. I probably posted about it...25-30 times and that was hardly rare. That was easily the consensus. Sign Chourio to a long-term deal. It's in pretty much everything. The "your off-season thread," threads about Yelich. It was a regular topic on here. I'll take your word for it that you didn't see it...somehow, but take mine that we absolutely were talking about it and hoping for it(and this exceeds expectations).

Yeah, but he was slow for an NFL back. He was slow...and that's after he lost ~20 pounds going off the NFL combine score. The "did he get more carries because he was the 11th pick," isn't something that can be answered objectively, but it stands to reason they gave the 11th overall pick carries...because he was the 11th overall pick. Of course they matter. But over 228 carries(Barber, who BTW had 213 carries at 4.7 yards and nearly 1,000 yards more in total, but ~235 more rushing yards) unless you're saying Dayne was just a short-yardage back(Which doesn't seem consistent with the 228 carries) that's a hard argument to make. Those aren't all short yardage. It's also a very inconsistent stat. The 2nd year in the league, Dayne had a 38.9 success % and Barber a 47%. That's a pretty big difference. Yet AGAIN this year Dayne got more carries(which would seem to support the "he got more carries as the 11th overall pick," narrative). Again, they each had 200+ carries. They weren't ABLE to use Dayne the same way they used Barber. They were able to do everything with Barber, not so much with Dayne.

Wisconsin has had two wildly different teams. One that's hitting open shots, playing with energy, moving. The other that's just flat and plays the same ugly style of basketball, but plays it sloppy. Marquette should win by 10 on talent, but this series seems like the better team seldom plays to expectations. I'm looking forward to it. I know I'm meant to hate Marquette but I don't. I like watching them play.

That's a bit of an odd assumption. Counting his brother's money as a deterrent? That's a HUGE assumption that he'd risk holding his hand out to his brother rather than just...make his own money. And yes, I think he'd be asking for a good amount. 8/80 is a good amount 4 years away from FA. That's a baseline. Maybe it is 7/80 with 2 TOs or whatever, but it'd be unrealistic of him to think he'd beat Murphy's deal. Finally, yes, you're ALWAYS going to be giving up FA years. There is zero reason for any team to commit this type of money to a player just to ensure they get their money through arbitration. The FA years are the only reason you consider giving ~80M to any player.

I just started listening and what a GREAT point they're making. You want to spend this money on Jackson Chourio or spend twice this on Cody Bellinger? It's a no-brainer. That's setting aside how overrated I think Bellinger's "bounce back" season was. The raw numbers were great, but projecting forward, the exit velo and the advanced analytics, that's a helluva risk.

I'd LOVE to become the Braves in this regard. They are set up so well moving forward. They have their stars all locked up just up until the back end of their prime years. Some are more expensive like Austin Riley(still a good value). He signed 3 years into his service time(well, as he was finishing his 3rd year) and has put up ~19 WAR the last 3 years. He's signed through age 34. Olson was heading into his 2nd year of arbitration, so you paid a premium there(and that worked out well thus far). Harris, Murphy, Albies, and then Acuna Jr. SIX of their 9 positions. Your C, 1B, 2B, 3B, CF, RF. All 6 are guys who you can reasonably expect 5-6 WAR from and in big years can, as we saw, out-perform even hat. I'd again continue to pound the drums for a Uribe deal, a Contreras deal, and maybe a Frelick deal. Obviously at very different numbers. Uribe for 8/30M or use Ashby/Peralta's deals. Contreras for an 8/80M type deal + 2 team options as well. Someone broke it down and compared it to what Murphy signed for next year and that's a fair deal relative to Murphy's and adds a ton of value to Contreras moving forward and allows you to do whatever with Quero. BUT--again, Jackson Chourio is in a different league than all of these players. What he's done at his age, what he's accomplished is just different. The upside is so much higher there. And it's rare. I would bet money Jackson Holliday doesn't sign that deal simply because he got a large signing bonus, he comes from money. And you just saw what it can cost if you wait a month or a few months with Carroll or Julio Rodriguez.

Yeah, Gibson was a massive human being. I thought he got up into the 400s. I actually thought he was that big for a time at UW, but they got him to lose some weight. It's just so rare for a human that big to be able to take the beating their knees, hips, ankles, back...all that stuff takes. And as we saw with Mekhi Becton, the time it takes to come back from injury can be much longer. It's very rare to have an Ogden-sized player who stays healthy his whole career. And almost all of those guys, once you get past 330 or so, you're going to have a lot of bad weight.

That's a REALLY dumb stat IMO. I would imagine Dayne would be higher simply because he'd be used in more short-yardage situations, but...that's not a particularly useful metric for me. But if you ARE going to use it, Barber had a significantly higher success rate in total during their time with the Giants. Yards per carry is a much better metric IMO when you're talking about the same team. You don't need to account for the OL like you do when talking about Barry vs Emmitt(imagine Barry running behind that 90's Cowboys OL). And you don't need to get real deep with EPA or stuff like that PFF does where you have someone grading every individual play. Something that's going to lead to inconsistencies even if it's the same person, but now you have multiple people doing it? The Giants went to the Super Bowl Dayne's rookie year. They spent the 11th pick. I could be wrong, but I don't think a HC in the NFL is going to give carries to an inferior back because he's not getting along with the back. But, that's just my opinion.

I tend to agree. I don't think he ever becomes Bettis-like. Bettis had extraordinarily quick feet for a back his size. Just in general he had quick feet. I'd also argue Dayne was never the "best" College Running Back of all time, but I get you're going by yards. Dayne had a really nice NFL career. Not everyone is going to be a superstar. He probably could have made a little more out of his ability, but I also think he was wildly overrated as the #11 pick and had a limited upside. Totally off the topic, but when I think about these big, bruising, physical backs, it just makes me marvel that much more at Jim Brown and Bo Jackson. Both were in that ~240 range with incredible speed and they were elusive. Brown at a time when many OL were barely 240!

Oh...I thought he got 5/85. The Covid year doesn't really matter in this regard(it certainly helped that he started, then opted out so it counted as a year of service, but not in their initial GTD offer).

Yes, but it's not a FULL 7 seasons. I'm the first to say, "it's closer to 7 seasons," but you really couldn't bring him up for OD before this contract. You had to worry about service time. So this could VERY possibly mean an additional 1st Rd draft pick, plus the money. Also, it's not a stupid game now. It's just "this is our guy, he's here through the age of 30...we don't need to start bracing 3-4 years in and talking about when we're going to trade him. That's really the huge thing. Most likely he's going to really struggle for stretches this year. A .770 OPS would be great, his D and Speed, also big. But that burns one year, then you'll likely have another fluke season. That's 2 years. By the time he really blows up and gets comfortable, you get maybe 1-2 years before you really start to worry about that(trading him). Burnes was actually an outlier in that he won his Cy Young earlier than normal, but that's been a constant issue and source of angst. How we're "blowing" the Burnes/Woodruff window. Well, it would have been all the worse if Chourio is the player people expect him to be. And again, if he's NOT the player we expect/hope he'll be, I don't think this is a bad deal even then. Even if you end up overpaying a little bit, he should provide 2-3 WAR at least with his power, speed, and glove. Maybe Byron Buxton isn't quite the "floor" for him, but it's pretty close...IMO.

What was LoCain GTD?

That's just it. You're not getting a whole lot for any of them right now. The most for Frelick, but he's got limited power, so why rush this and make any moves. Signing Chourio doesn't mean we need to rush and trade someone else. If Wiemer had Brinson like value, then maybe, but he's got GG potential in RF, should be able to hit for power and even if he only hits .220, that's a valuable player. Mitchell might have the most value for a team that believes the injuries have been fluke, but...let 'em play. I'd rather miss out on the light return and play it out than get a marginal package back and trade away an impact player. As for Black over Frelick, Black has been playing 3B/1B and came up as a 2B. And I don't believe he's a far greater base runner. I'm not even sure he's better. Black stole a lot of bases last year, but Frelick has better speed, and better defense and was a much higher-rated prospect just a few months ago.

You're not getting it. Think how much better Atlanta would be if they spent 40M on a REAL stud instead of giving Acuna Jr 100M and 10 years of team control?

I'm learning so much! Now...what if they hadn't signed Yelich and INSTEAD signed him for ~100M that year and another player for 100M? Just think how AWESOME we'd be then!

It took me a while, but I was struggling to! I was laughing WAAAY too hard!

Haslam owns nearly as much of the Bucks as Mark A owns of the Brewers. The revenue sharing is...too complicated I guess.

I will call your Chapman and up you an Ohtani! Put your money where your mouth is and guarantee they'll sign Ohtani!

LOL...no sunshine, I'm not certain of it AT ALL. I'm laughing at your wording. What I am certain of is that you keep using the entire 8-year value of Chourio's deal and somehow tying that to Matt Olson/Chapman(a Matt who played for Oakland once at least) as though there's any correlation. This. This is what I'm laughing at. Oooh! Hot take! They don't sign the top 3B and arguably the 2nd best position player available! I FURTHER guarantee "Matt Olson" signs for more than your 3/48, 2/32 projections. Hoskins likely as well. LOL...over 8 years or just this year? LITERALLY NOBODY HAS SAID THEY WILL SIGN OLSON/CHAMPMAN AND HOSKINS! This is all a figment of your own imagination. It's simply been explained to you that the reason they won't ISN'T because they're paying Chourio 80M over 8 years! What can you still possibly be confused about😂 I assure you, I have not once orgasmed over the front office! But ooh...you bold! Dude...you totally made this conversation up in your head and are just randomly running with it now!

Given the market for bats, I think he's significantly low on both, but given the scope of how wrong he's been in general, it almost seems irrelevant.