BrewerFan

Right, OR just imagine we had Ronald Acuna Jr. We'd be looking at trading him without this type of deal, THIS off-season. How miserable would that be? Your fan base would be complaining you're just a minor league team for the big market teams. And maybe Chourio doesn't agree, but I think you have more to lose by NOT signing him than vice versa.

They're starting to look like the Saints. Not quite that bad, but just jumping through hoops with the Cap to be an average team. They did have 13 wins last year, but we all know how legit that was.

LOL...there HAS to be a better way to articulate this! Seriously though, I wouldn't trade Taylor. I don't know that you get a ton for him and it certainly doesn't hurt to have an athletic RHed bet off the bench.

I get it doesn't suit his style as well as it suits Mellusi, but I still think he's better back irrespective of the scheme.

I wouldn't feel the need to do anything in the OF...other than give Chourio almost every start. Preferably they put Frelick in LF to start most games(maybe sit him on occasion vs tough lefties) and in RF you platoon Mitchell/Wiemer or start Wiemer in AAA. But an OF combination with any of the 4 young guys and Taylor gives you probably the best OF defense in the game. I imagine Yelich will still get thrown out in LF for another year, but it'd really make more sense to try and DH him or play him at 1B in camp, see if he can still play there at a high enough level. Just start the transition. We saw the impact Frelick made without being an offensive juggernaut, the same with Wiemer and Mitchell. Their speed and defense energize a team. If they just start to hit like they're expected, it's going to be an awesome OF.

It really wouldn't make sense for it to be much less. I guess the ideal contract would be 8 years with 4 team options, but unlikely he'd agree to that. 10 years, 2 option years. 150M GTD would be on the high end. 10/100 would be the sweet spot IMO.

Mellusi was not the better RB for any scheme. The scheme may fit Mellusi better, Allen was clearly the superior back and it's incredible it took them as long to realize that as it did. They finally started just giving Allen the ball after the loss to WSU and he started dominating...and Mellusi was injured late in that Purdue game. He's a nice back and he's good out of the backfield, but he's not on the level of Allen in a WingT, a Veer, or a spread. Give me Allen in every scheme.

The Packers actually had a self-imposed limit due to their cap situation. Some teams were spending 150K on an UDFA, but that's a kicker or a priority edge(I'd say a guy like Brenton Cox Jr, but he still came here). I don't believe we spent over 15K on anyone. But, I take your point. A veteran leader who's bought in is always important. Haven't seen Allen say he's not playing in the Bowl game yet, but I assume that's coming soon.

Definitely one of the areas he's still got room to grow in. I know they wanted him to put more air under the ball on those deep throws, but when Watson has 5 yards, just get it there. You do give the WRers a chance if you underthrow it, you're more likely to have your guy catch it, he's gotta fight back through the DBs, and could be a DPI, but you're leaving points on the table. That 58-yard completion was one of his worst throws that game. I don't believe that was as big of a problem as the fact that we were just seeing a lot of zone and our guys were covered up(they weren't making great reads on simple option routes or sitting down on drags, etc). But whatever the case may be, the one thing we all wanted to see this year was improvement and development out of Love and ultimately to see if he could be "the guy," for us. I'm not positive we've got the 2nd answer, but we're definitely seeing the first aspect of that play out. I think we're REAL close to being sold on the 2nd half, but that's not something we can definitively know until we see better defenses(this week is a good test).

That's an interesting question as it'd probably benefit the NFLPA to do so. QBs ARE actually overpaid IMO. We're talking about what a massive discount this would be for Love(or if not a discount a favorable deal for the Packers). I don't think we actually see any changes as unions really never limit what a member can earn, but in this particular case, it'd make some sense. The bigger thing with Love is the GTD money. I'd ideally want to stick to ~80M, maybe 100M GTD vs injury. That way in a year or two IF he's not progressing as you hope, you can get out of it with a big, but not devastating cap hit. I'm really curious what the Packers think at this point. I'm about 80% convinced Love is the right guy and that if you allow the receiving core to develop, work on that OL so that he has time to throw like he has in pretty much every game he's had success. They've also played themselves out of realistically trading for one of the top QBs or being in position to draft one, so it's a JJ McCarthy-type pick if you did want to go another route. That seems like a poor use of resources, but...who knows.

Just look at what Daniel Jones signed for. If you're a starting QB, you're getting 30M a year. That's pretty much the baseline and with the cap expected to jump(they spread the Covid losses out over 4 years, but were ahead of schedule repaying it) that could be one of the cheaper QB salaries. I disagree. He was making big throws. He was clearly missing on some easy passes, but I think that's exaggerated. There was a HUGE throw to Musgrave for example, that was the Bears game(I'm pretty certain) but he took the check-downs, he took what was there. Vs the Saints, he struggled early on but then got going. Missing the check-downs was more in the ensuing 4 game stretch. He was throwing the ball downfield a lot, but that was in the game plan. I also believe you have to take a wholistic view of it. If you're going to compare him to seasoned vets, then sure, he wasn't good, but I think we're all grading him on a curve here, no? Looking at his development, ball placement, those underlying indicators you're talking about. He was going through his reads, he was starting off with his first read, going through them and often coming all the way back. A HUGE part of that the fronts we played. They didn't pressure him, but he was playing well. He was late on a few. There was one big one vs Doubs where it was particularly obvious re-watching it. He was also struggling with that out route. Throwing it juuust a shade too much inside where the DB can make a play on it. But the WRers were also struggling to create separation and so much of it is developing chemistry. We clearly took that for granted with Rodgers. He was demanding and he got on WRers, but the game moves so fast, you need to know exactly when a WRer is going to break, if he's going against zone, you're sometimes expecting him to read that and adjust and he's just running his route as it's called. I think as we've seen the WRers grow, getting Watson back has been huge, but we've also seen Love throw the ball with more conviction and a little quicker. But even in those games where he was completing 50% of his passes, he was making throws that not many QBs can make and using his feet to extend plays. They were a last second FG from starting the season 3-0 and while he wasn't prime Rodgers, he was showing more than enough to make you excited that we'd found our starting QB. The biggest thing he's improved at...IMO, are those throws that put a WRer into concussion protocol. Again, Rodgers was so good in this regard. He VERY seldom put his WRers in danger. Maybe even to the detriment of the team as he didn't like working over the middle(not sure if that started when Cobb broke his leg on that low hit, or with Finley's injury and just the lack of a consistent threat down the seam). But he's gotten SO much better in that regard. That probably lines up with getting the ball out quicker, giving the receiver a chance to protect himself, but these are things you expect a young QB to struggle with IMO. There was a stretch, through the first 3 games IIRC...the Packers had by FAR the most penalties and penalty yards in the NFL(almost 100 per game). But they DID have 4 DPI calls go their way. 2 vs the Falcons and 2 vs the Saints. It was 3 of their 4 longest gains through 3 weeks. But I don't recall a disproportionate number since then. EDIT-Video now available. It's just on YouTube; "New Orleans Saints vs. Green Bay Packers Game Highlights | NFL 2023 Week 3." It's helpful to go back and just watch the highlights. I started this in the 2nd half when Love gets rolling(definitely some poor decisions early on, but also very little separation). But the incredible throw to Doubs~7:45 and then Reed at ~12:20, were incredible balls. There's a missed DPI on Toure earlier. There's a clear DPI where you could call it a bail-out at 10:14. One of those underthrown balls where the WRer works back, but the DB doesn't see it. Fairly common. Then another blatant one a few seconds later. Both times the DB could have just made a play if he gets his head around, but that's also part of the game. Identifying the one one-on-one and giving your WRer a chance. There were also 2 vs ATL for 45 and 43 yards. I'd say just rewatching this game, the difference in 1st half to 2nd half is obviously a couple of amazing throws, him using his feet, but he's definitely taking the easy throw MORE often. Now, is Love-Watson becoming Culpepper-Moss? Hell, Watson is more physical than Moss. I'm expecting a better version!

Is that an extension, or are we tearing up the final year and giving him 5/150? I'm just kinda curious if we're going to push to extend him now or if we wait another year. 5/150 certainly seems like a good deal(all the better if it's on top of the 5th year, but I'd guess you'd void that year).

It feels like the first 3 games he was really good, then he struggled for 4, then really good again the last 4. The KC game will be a HUGE barometer for Love. They play defense the way we SHOULD play. They put 5-6 guys up on the LOS, they get Chris Jones one one-on-one a lot, or overload one side and make the QB get the ball out quickly. They don't have great DBs, but they play the ball and try and knock you off your route. Just fits the Packers SO perfectly(when healthy). I'd love to see Spagnuolo as our DC, but since he's not leaving KC, he's as close to Leonhard as I've seen in the NFL. For KC's reputation as being similar to the Packers under Rodgers, ie, a good offensive team, but one that's lacking defensively, they've been top 10 every year under him save for one season. That's hard to do when you're going up and down the field as Mahomes has done much of his career. Your expectations may have been a bit out of line. I don't think he's been bailed out all that often, but what he has had to deal with is a porous OL and a receiving corp that has been inconsistent at best. Guys in and out of the lineup, not mature enough to read the coverages. Not faulting them, but he hasn't had seasoned guys like Rodgers did...and yet, through 12 games, he's ahead of Rodgers in TDs, Turnovers, and yards. That's certainly not to say you're locked into him or he's PROVEN he's the guy, but he's certainly proven he can be the guy. And I think, particularly the last couple of weeks, we've had outstanding game plans on both sides of the ball(gotta give Barry some credit). Watson needs a big game this Sunday though. Guys who can make KC pay for sitting in that cover 1. I'm sure they'll be shading over to give help to whoever is on him opening things up for the other guys. This week will be interesting though.

Right...really the only reason to not break camp with him is the service time. Gain that extra year. And I think that's a significant motivator to get a deal done. If he won't be a FA for 7 years...well, then a 10-year deal and guaranteeing 9 figures makes a lot more sense. I don't know how you come to an agreement on the number though. Especially with Acuna Jr, who'd be in a contract year, now locked up, and that deal looking bad. You're probably not getting Chourio done for 8 years, 90M and two option years at 17M per with a 10M buyout? So I'd guess 8/120 and a couple option years at 20M with 10M buyouts? GTD 130M then? I don't see why he wouldn't be a great defender and or base runner. He has been great, he's gotten better as he's progressed. He was better in CF last year than the year prior. And as mentioned, Spencer Torkleson was a 1B/DH whose only value is in his bat. Chourio should have little trouble surpassing .8 WAR just with his legs and glove. If he's a .240 hitter or a .280+ hitter will determine if he's a MVP-caliber player or just a good player, but he's got a high floor just due to his athletic profile. And finally, I've become pretty indifferent about what "the fans" will do if he isn't a superstar right out of the gate. It's a given the fans, the ones who hear we've got this good prospect, but are more casual fans-(not an insult, just a reality, people have lives and other hobbies) -their support ebbs and flows. It's fickle. The more diehard fans should understand a 20-year-old isn't expected to come up and dominate.

I don't see why they'd take a guy who's played catcher his entire life, but isn't an elite athlete and move him to 3B. That's rare and when it's done, it's usually down at the lower level of the minors. He doesn't need to play 3B. He needs to continue catching. There's no rush. It'll likely take Quero a couple years before he's ready to produce anywhere near Contreras. I'd guess even then he'd have more value defensively, less offensively, and at that point they can determine if trading Contreras is worth it. But 4 years away from Free Agency, I see no reason to stunt his growth at C to play him at 3B.

I'd say he's proven to be elite in just about every league he's played in...which is all the more impressive given his age. The reason he may not be up is that they really get close to 7 years of service time out of a player and if they wait 2 months, they can keep him up all year, and then have 6 more seasons. I'm hoping they approach him as the Rays did Franco(despite how that turned out) or the Braves Acuna Jr/Albies...every other star they have) and lock him into a long-term contract early. I think he's proven he's a rare talent and even if he falls short of being that truly elite bat, he's gonna hit for power, he's got incredible speed and he can play elite defense. If you're gonna roll the dice on a player, it's him. Not a Hiura/Weeks, even a Prince. Basically a player who's entire value lies in their ability to hit. But if he DOES reach his ceiling as a hitter, he's going to price himself out of Milwaukee VERY quickly as Soto did in Washington.

That and you also can't just plug any of this into a mathematical equation and say "this is the player with the appropriate surplus value it'd take to acquire Eloy." We've heard all about the White Sox outlandish requests. Unless they went from wanting multiple top prospects for Eloy to wanting to dump him, I do think it'll take a Black-type prospect to get him. If it just took a lottery ticket, he'd have been on the Brewers when we were searching for RHed bats so hard this past deadline. His value, on a last-place team, most likely didn't go from multiple top prospects at the trade deadline to a low level lottery ticket in what amounts to a salary dump after 2 more months of Baseball.

I'm late to this one, but I loved Avina. I know he had a loooong way to go and it was a long shot, we have a lot of OFers, all of that. But that swing was so pretty and the power so easy, I just would have liked to have kept him. But my prospect evaluation has sucked compared to the Brewers, so...I'll defer to them.

Ya think? Are we giving that type of money out to a guy like Mellusi? I'm curious how much the staff even wants him back given the young guys we have coming in. Then I remember he did look like an ideal fit in this offense, so maybe they want him back more than I do. Your comment was likely more about how little an UDFA makes more than anything.

Ya think? I'd still give it another year, but he's looked...REALLY good. I still want to see him hitting those deep throws more. It took Josh Allen a year+ of playing before he was hitting them, but you can't underthrow Watson. If Watson doesn't make a good play on that ball, we're talking about what a bad throw that was. That said, given all the obstacles he's had, it's hard to not be impressed. I don't know what the equivalent of the Rodgers extension would be in modern NFL money and I'm not gonna spend time looking it up, but if it's something like 5/200 with maybe 80M in a SB...ADDED to his existing year, I think I could live with that. If you're talking about paying him 50M or so, even if that's what all the young QBs are getting, I'm definitely holding off. I do think he's more impressive than Hurts, but Hurts has that dominant OL, he's got a top 10 pick at WRer, AJ Brown, and he's got talented RBs/TEs. I do love that the Love haters have at least had to shut up for a bit! That's nice...

Driver is fair. I see some Adams type ability in creating separation. Obviously not on that level, but the way he does it. Toure was the guy I thought/hoped would be like Driver. Driver was just so incredibly quick(and tough) for a smaller guy. I also don't know if Driver's listed size is accurate. 6' 194? Wicks is 6'1 206? Is this just memory failing me or him not having the combine for an exact number that makes Driver seem smaller than his listed height and weight? In any event, it looks like the last two classes have produced a LOT of really nice depth on the 3rd day with the potential for a couple of really important franchise mainstays like Tom, Carlson, Doubs, Valentine, and maybe Wicks(it feels like he's proving he's a big piece as much as Doubs or anyone but Reed at this point). I think the two biggest things, LVN wasn't flashy. He didn't just come blowing off the edge and lighting guys up like Nolan Smith(though I'd have very little confidence in Smith setting the edge). He was more of a physical player...and everyone wanted JSN. They wanted a WRer, NOT another edge. Comparing his size to Bosa or Sweat, just about any of the elite 4-3 edge rushers, he's as big or bigger than them. He's an inch shorter and the exact same weight as Myles Garrett. He really is just about as close of a prospect as you can get to Gary. In terms of what/how they played in College. Van Ness played more edge, but he also lined up inside. He came in and was obviously a backup. Both were high-effort players who were limited. I'm not holding my breath that LVN becomes Rashan Gary as that's just an unfair standard to hold anyone to, but a really good, top ~10-15 edge? That seems within reach. Maybe on the higher end given the depth at that position, but opposite Gary?

Ok...that's fair. That looks really bad at the moment, but I'm not going to make a judgment on that move at this time. I'd like to know who turned down 2 1sts for Burnes, who made the decision in the first place to trade Moore+1sts and a 3rd to move up for any QB in that draft class. That was a Baker Mayfield type class. No obvious studs, a QB 1st just because of positional value, not talent(which is always the case, but it's far more justifiable in a year like this with Maye and Williams). The Bears and Cards were the clear winners IMO as soon as they made those trades...even with the Texans being much better than expected. I do know the owner came in and he wanted to win and he was a bit clueless, so if that's what you mean, he wasn't as forward-looking in his rebuild, that's fair. I'm gonna hold off on crowning Stroud over Young for just a bit longer, but it certainly looks like a HR at the moment.

How is it their owner? I know he's rich and impatient, but they haven't spent poorly on big-name FAs. They did go all in on Young last year when I thought it was smarter to go the Cards/Texans route(though look at the Texans now) but was that the Owner or the GM? It seems pretty obvious to me that it's NOT Reich's fault at least.

I don't think so. This feels consistent with EVERYTHING else with Heyman speculating we may be a bit more likely to keep him, at least until the ASB(then re-evaluate), that's it. This isn't some big about-face.

Right. There's no figurative gun to their head. They can sit back, wait for the Pitchers to fall off the market. They can even wait until early on into next year and into the deadline as was said in the article and re-evaluate. Making a decision that it's probably best to trade Burnes doesn't mean accepting whatever is offered.