BrewerFan

Ok...I just read that he wasn't eligible until the 14th on....MLB rumors or something, but I'll defer to you and @SF70 since you seem confident. Again, peripherals look strong. 92.8 Exit Velo ~51% hard hit rate 10% BB rate Seems like he could help. If he can't...well, we're not sitting down Eddie Matthews to try him out, so...worth the potential payoff.

He can't play until Sept 14th I don't believe. He was put on the 60 day DL by the Yankees and that's his first eligible day back. So I guess he can rehab in Nashville until then?

Not his rookie year. His rookie year his grade vs the run was 82. His grade as a pass rusher was much lower. It was his 2nd and 3rd year when his pass rush took a big jump and it was primarily pass rushing lanes letting mobile QBs get outside the pocket.

The NFLPA has been trying VERY hard to get that franchise tag removed, but the owners will never go back on that one. That's one of those things the owners just will not move on. It's what really keeps the market from getting just...ridiculously out of control. How often does a truly elite player come on the FA market? Kirk Cousins was hardly truly elite and got a 3 year fully guaranteed(for skill AND injury) deal. And then he's continued to get them. So imagine no franchise tag? Bosa is hitting the FA market, Jones...and instead of Nick Bosa looking for a 35M deal, he could very possibly get a 40M AAV deal. But instead he's negotiating against deals signed by the other top edge rushers(his brother, TJ Watt) who were only negotiating with one team. Watson, a guy with a terrible past and about as unattractive a player as you could ask for wasn't even on the open market and still blew the market up with a 5/230 full GTD(injury and skill) contract that forced other teams to not quite match it, but come close. If these players were FAs after their 4 or 5 years, the salaries of the top players would balloon that much more and for obvious reasons the owners don't want that. Getting rid of the franchise tag was a non-starter in 2010-11, it was a non-starter in 2020-21 and the next CBA which runs through 2030, it'll likely be a non-starter by then as well. It'll take the players willing to sit out a lot longer than they ever have to get significant changes. I think your solution makes some sense, but I still don't think the owners will ever agree to it. Adams would have been able to leave without the Packers getting a 1st and a 2nd for him. A compromise is probably the best you'll be able to do. I think at most you should be able to tag a player once, it shouldn't be an exclusive rights and you should probably lower the value of the compensation. 2 1sts is just more than most teams are willing to give up for most positions. The franchise tag is certainly abused, but I don't think it's going anywhere.

What point are we arguing here? Since July 1st he's got a .669 OPS vs lefties? Ok...fine. I don't know how to break down RH/LH splits by months, but I'll take your word for that. Yet still, on the season, Taylor's still at under .600. This is really simple. His OPS vs lefties(which is pretty much exclusively when he's playing now) is .864. Taylor's is .596. The Brewers also probably aren't using arbitrary starting points to measure when using platoon splits. We ALL get his struggled offensively as a whole. However even that struggling as a WHOLE isn't as much as Taylor has struggled...vs lefties. So...I don't know what we're going back and forth about. I said I understood the Brewers rationale for it. And...I do. Better vs lefties, better in CF. Not a significant factor, but he also hits ties up that game vs Steele(don't remember if there was anyone on) when he drilled a ball to the wall that is probably out in any other field on any other night.

Yeah, I don't think that's how that would have worked.

Again, going back between what I'd do, I'd send him down until the end of the AAA season, then bring him back for the last few weeks. Give him regular ABs, let him play... I just don't think the Brewers will. I definitely want him on the playoff roster though...for all those reasons.

I really like Devanney, BUT...again, I'll just point out Donaldson is still hitting the ball hard(92.8 exit velo, over 50% hard hit % and 10% walk rate). I like Devanney a lot, but I could see Donaldson having a really nice Sept.

Ok...again, to be clear, I said that I'd send Wiemer down. That's how this started. I then said I understand why the Brewers wouldn't want to. Wiemer, even with his struggles has a OPS of .864 vs lefties while Taylor a .596 OPS vs lefties. So we all agree Frelick should start vs righties, but I understand why the Brewers want to keep Wiemer in the lineup for lefties and in CF.

I understand and I said I'd send him down, but he's still got an OPS of ~850 vs lefties and Taylor is under .600 and again, I think Wiemer is a better defensively...so as I said, I'd send him down, but I get why the Brewers don't want to.

I don't think Taylor is on the same level defensively as Taylor and Wiemer is still very good vs lefties.

10% walk rate 92.8 MPH exit velo 51.4% hard hit rate The issue can't be with his offense, so just don't like the guy? I get that. Taking a shot on Donaldson makes a lot of sense though.

I've just heard...repeatedly that he's an *******. But never 1st person. The Jackie thing...in and of itself, given the context I guess I don't have a problem with that(you compare having fun and back flips and the minor criticism you get with Jackie Robinson and the 'barrier he broke and...you deserve to get mocked for it). He just strikes me as a guy who has strong opinions and makes sure you know all of them and a lot are probably not popular in a clubhouse.

They could have sent Wiemer down for a couple weeks. Even through the AAA season. I feel like he needs regular ABs and they're gonna roll with Frelick for now. But now you've got Taylor and Frelick as your CFers? I get why they wouldn't want to do that.

I'd have picked up Grichuk. .323.387.583 .970 vs lefties. Home/Away splits are normal...so it's not like that was all in Col. But he's also been terrible with LA and who's place is he taking? Not Canha or Santana. 40 man rosters, he'd be worth it.

I saw a hilarious argument on Twitter. This guy was...adamant that Hunter Renfroe would be claimed "by a team that's rebuilding like the Yankees to provide a veteran presence for their young guys. It was pointed out that they just waived Bader(a better veteran presence as he was ON the team, half the price...). But none of these players will "even make it to contenders."

How do you think that's going to work? What do they say to the NFL? They want everyone paid more. 'You should value Running Backs more?' And that money has to come from somewhere, so who do they value less? Edge rushers, CBs, LTs? I also don't think the Colts are placing any valuation on Taylor. I think they're making a point. He said he'd be there, they've become a very poorly run organization with players gambling and being late and...all types of stuff. If you're actually placing a dollar amount on what they're asking for, a #1 WR(which Waddle is) on a rookie deal PLUS a 2nd is more like 25-30M. But that's a made up valuation and the Dolphins(and Packers) have said they didn't make any official offer. And Taylor is saying he is still hurt. Arbitration isn't a fix all. I don't agree with the NFL...entirely. But I completely understand why they're doing what they're doing and I don't understand how there's any scenario in which an arbiter is going to come in and force change. The NFLPA is going to have to demand...I don't know, RBs are exempt from the franchise tag or something along those lines. Then JT could play this year out, hit the open market. But as it is, the Colts can tag him for 2 years and pay him less than 25M total, now he's 26 with 900 more carries on him(presuming he would have decided to play this year) and he's bouncing around for one year deals. But even so, not fair doesn't mean it's actionable on the NFLPAs behalf.

I'd be calling them smart...if it got them under the luxury tax line and meant they got a 1st for Ohtani. This move...is a smart move by the Angels. It's...EVERY other decision the Angels have made leading them to this place. Why keep a bunch of players who won't be here next year, cost money and will only give us a worse pick(if they do anything) and again, impact where our compensation pick will be? The Yankees are doing pretty much the same thing, they just didn't give up prospects to add more rentals. This doesn't seem briliant so much as...obvious. If you're close to the luxury tax, obviously you do this. And again, what rational reason is the Commish going to give? Some fringe playoff teams are going to get a few marginal upgrades? But that's part of the rules. They added salary a month ago through the means available to them, not they've gone 8-18 or whatever, and they're cutting it.

I don't follow any of this. The only way Taylor and the Colts are going through arbitration is if he's on the PUP after 6 weeks and doesn't accrue a full season and then the NFLPA files a complaint arguing the Colts acted in bad faith regarding Taylor's health...and then it's a whole ugly thing. But they didn't put him on the NFI, he's on the PUP for an injury he suffered last year. The NFLPA could file a grievance, but under what premise? The Colts, coming off a 4 win season, didn't offer him more money than they needed to in his last year(When they still have the option to tag him twice)? On what grounds do the Colts lose that? I don't see how this goes to arbitration. I see it being a slow, ugly break up in which Irsay runs his mouth, but...again, aside from a quirky rule in the new CBA Re; The PUP list in the final year of a rookie deal, if they activate him before week 6, he's got. But the Colts are under zero responsibility to offer him another penny. It'd be like if Jenkins held out last year. They have no obligation to pay him X amount of dollars when he's still under contract.

So did Grichuk, Lopez and Moore.

I'd love that(not the 17M a year for a RB, but JT in this system). But the Colts were just wasting people's time. Packers offered a 3rd and Dillon. Colts countered Dillon, Watson and a 1st. Translation, 'this is a show, we're putting Taylor in his place.'

I completely forgot they still had Chris Slayton. I'm a little(lot) surprised they brought Melton back. With Reed, Toure and now Melton, he doesn't seem like a great fit on this offense and he just didn't get many snaps on offense(pretty much disappeared as the preseason went on). But he was used regularly at Gunner, so guess he got the edge there. I do not understand the appeal of Dallen Leavitt. STer, but to cut Ford and Carpenter while claiming a safety? Leavitt isn't going to play defensive snaps and I really can't imagine he's that much better on STs than any number of players would be. Athletic ability and effort. That's all STs is individually. Coach needs to put the right players in place(for instance, not putting DTs on the wing for FG) but running down and covering a kick? Anyway, 6 deep at edge, Banks has very little value. He should be an obvious one. Odumegwu is part of the IPP, so really only at 69 players and 15 on the PS.

They're 11 games out of the WC and 63-68. Why are they adding a rental?

I remember being in there thanks to Wendy and Sal. Kinda puts Stearns and Attanasio into perspective.

I understood they really wanted to keep Ohtani, but they could have gotten an unprecedented deal for a rental. Amazing they actually traded AWAY prospects and now they're just trying to save some money apparently? They're not the Rockies because I at least understand why they do what they do...it just never smart.