BrewerFan

Yeah, the TV deals are a huge part of it. The TV deals are the reason the Packers got a check for 435 Million dollars on the first day of the league year. That covers them for the entire season. They can afford to pay their entire roster without doing anything else. As for where they rank outside of the TV money that everyone gets, it's just a guess as everyone keeps it quiet, but what I'm saying is the Packers wouldn't still be in Green Bay most likely without Rooney and Mara in particular agreeing on how the NFL was going to go forward. Revenue sharing and a salary cap. The reason the NFL was pushing them to move to Milwaukee in the 80s(when Milwaukee was a larger city and I would guess close to a top 15 market whereas now it's 30th or 31st). Manfred has made some statements that... infer he wants to keep moving toward something closer to the NFL's structure with TV deals. I don't know exactly how that'd look. I can't imagine how they could get close to what the NFL has, but even if more of the streaming goes through MLB, there's a pathway there to take a bigger chunk of the pie at least over the next 10-20 years and move toward something a BIT more equitable. I don't see a way MLB is ever going to be on a even playing field, but if they can get it where there's "only" a 150M dollar gap between the top payroll and the bottom, that'd be nice. That means a floor and a cap.

I was kinda thinking about that. Even going the other way with it. Ashby starts and Misiorowski comes in. Look to get 3IP out of each. I'd imagine teams would still go with a LHed heavy lineup to start with, unsure when Mis would come in. The problem with that is it'd really stress your BP. So... I may even try and go through this stretch and then sit Misiorowski down for a couple starts. Maybe he gets a tight calf and needs a short DL trip. He's so nasty with that FB and his extension, it's just about being smart with him and not overworking him...which they're doing a good job at.

I'm alright with "none" as an answer, but I'd REALLY like to add one more power arm to the Bullpen. Helsley would be great. I'd say Aroldis Chapman, but he no longer looks to be available. Michael Soroka would be a bit under the radar, but I think he fits best in the pen. And his numbers are a bit inflated due to one blow up(7ER 1IP vs Boston). But, the two best options would be Helsley and David Bednar. This is assuming they don't make a bigger deal with the Twins. (I'm already at a B for the Brewers trades...I don't care if it's the deadline or not, they made two trades...that I did not like at all at the time and brought back Vaughn and Quinn Priester. That's a helluva return in-season. Now they've added Danny Jansen to give Contreras some time off behind the plate and they made these moves without giving up much).

Well... that's certainly true. Ernesto Martinez being penciled in as the heavy side of the platoon would NOT be a real encouraging prospect. He's 26 and in AAA and he's hitting .234/.356 with a paltry .375 SLG. That's really not hitting "very well," when he's on the field. That's a guy who draws walks. If we got rid of Bauers and go with a LHed 1B next year, it'd almost certainly be Black at this point. I feel like you get laser focused on these prospects and... just kinda push no matter how they progress. I'd gladly bring him back as a MiLB FA, but there's no reason to add him to the 40 man.

I mean, you'll have Myers, Patrick stretched out(you may also have Cortes back in the rotation). Ashby and Hall can throw 45-50 pitches pretty easily. It's shaping up to a pretty good situation to handle the 19 games in 18 days(I believe that's what it is). Ashby...I'm thinking is going to be used both in late inning high leverage situations and in a multi inning role in the playoffs. I I still would like a reliever you can slot in ahead of Mears, but I'm not sure who that'd be. In either scenario, I think Henderson to the pen makes a LOT of sense. He's really pretty similar to Freddy Peralta as a young prospect. The FB, not having a full repertoire. Not sure his FB is as good as Peralta's when he came up, but he's got a better #2 pitch. It's a helluva luxury to have.

Because of how the trade worked out? At the time of that trade, Schoop had been worth 2.4 WAR in 85 games. Suarez has been worth 3.4 in 105 games. Schoop was also coming off a much better year(6.1 WAR and 10 WAR the previous 2 years) and at the time of the trade, as a 2B, hit 17 HRs. So he also provided that power. Just as importantly, he was 26 years old, not 34. I think comparing Suarez to Schoop is a lot more accurate than comparing Henderson with Small or the list of pitchers you compared him to.

You mean when the Brewers BEST players had just a year or two before Free Agency and we'd have ONE playoff appearance since 1982? Not pissed, but I WAS NOT a huge fan of the move. I wanted them to go out and trade for Greinke. I thought that was the smarter move. 4 years of team control vs a rental. But AGAIN, very-very different situation to what we have now. How much better are our chances? 1%? 2%? How much does a good starting pitcher you have for the better part of the next SEVEN years help your chances? But lets look at Caleb Durbin vs Suarez as everyone is just kinda taking it for granted this is a MASSIVE upgrade. And I'll agree, it's an upgrade... but how big of one. Pros-Hits for power. That's a big one, nobody is denying that. The 3R HR is king in the post-season. Cons-OPS is ~230 points lower away from AZ than it is in AZ, led the league in Ks 3 years, 27% K rate this year, BB rate in the bottom 15% in MLB, hits for a very low average, very poor OBP. He plays poor defense for a pitching staff that's extremely GB heavy. What usually happens in the post-season? Guys that strike out a lot in the regular season, they tend to strike out at a HIGHER rate in the post-season as teams aren't saving their BPs, they're bringing their SPers back in for a couple innings or throwing their high leverage relievers earlier in the game and for longer. ZERO question he'd be a good addition for the Brewers. That's not in doubt. The question is does he move the neddle enough to sacrifice 14, 21 years ofd team control of other young players? No, they really didn't, but you're comparing two VASTLY different sports. 1-We were desperate to keep Giannis. To use YOUR comparison, this would be like "selling their soul," back when Giannis was JUST at the start of his career(Giannis=Chourio). 2-The Brewers do not have the same concerns. Chourio is locked up for the next 8 years, Misiorowski the next 5 at least(though, they're talking about an extension, something I hope comes to fruition). And they have BIG TIME impact prospects in the minors working their way up and prospects at every level. The ONLY teams better set up for the next 4-5 years are teams like the Dodgers who can keep throwing 400M more a year at their payroll than the Brewers. 3- In the NBA, ONE player makes a HELLUVA lot bigger difference than ONE player in Baseball. It's not even remotely close. I'd ALSO say that the Bucks "sold their sold" for Dame far more than Jrue in a desperate attempt to fix the poor trades they'd already made. Bottom line, the Bucks were an OLD team and their window was closing. The Brewers are a YOUNG team and their window JUST opening this year. Well, he wasn't actually. He'd fallen because unlike Henderson who was both younger AND performed VERY well in AAA and in limited starts with the big league team, Ortiz was both older and back in AA and performing WORSE than he had the year prior. So he was descending where as Henderson was ASCENDING. That's why Ortiz was not the #62 prospect AT THE TIME of the trade. I don't recall if he'd fallen completely out of the top 100, but he regressed whereas Henderson leapt into the rankings due to his performance this year. Clearly two players who's arrows were pointing in VERY different directions. I'm a bit confused as to why you cite Suarez having a better year... though he is. Not sure how much you can count on him to continue to hit at this level when the last 5 years COMBINED he's put up a OPS of .754 and hasn't had a year over an .800 OPS and has mostly hit in AZ this year, but on top of that, you dismiss how much better Henderson has been than Ortiz in the year Ortiz was traded. It's also a far different situation. -The defense wasn't as important with the shifts. -Moose had at least been consistent. You knew what you were going to get. -Yelich had NOT signed an extension at that point. He had two years left, Cain was getting older but still performing well. Similar to 2011, the Brewers appeared to have a much smaller window. Of course, we actually traded Moose for Jorge Lopez, a pitcher who'd struggled badly at the Big League Level and Brett Phillips, a good defensive CFer. This would be more akin to a Carlos Rodriguez and a...Blake Perkins type deal(though Perkins is probably more valuable). Basically two spare parts as Lopez was 25 and Phillips was hitting ~.170 that year. Of course, it'll cost substantially more than that.

Really? The SAME chances as Luis Ortiz or Ethan Small despite having a 60 grade FB and a 60 grade Change and already perfroming well... in an admittedly small sample size, but also dominating in the Minor Leagues? Then lets go the other way. Henderson has "just of a chance of being Taylor Jungmann, Tyler Thornburg Luis Ortiz or Ethan Small," as he does of being Corbin Burnes, Freddy Peralta, Brandon Woodruff OR a dominant reliever such as Josh Hader, Devin Williams, Abner Uribe, etc...etc... Why you're going back and citing VERY different pitchers from a time the Brewers notoriously struggled to develop pitching and randomly comparing guys who... really aren't comparable to Henderson is confusing to me. The guy he's ACTUALLY the most similar to is Freddy Peralta. Peralta came up throwing in the 93-95 range... like Henderson. It had that ride... like Henderson. But Peralta didnt' have a 2nd pitch like Henderson's change. Either way, the guy was dominant in 4 starts and he's performed at every level of the minors and you're bringing up Ethan Small? This is just an odd take. Especially when a guy has already shown he can dominate MLB pitching.

Yeah, here's the thing that you and obviously the MLBPA is missing. They'd make MORE if they had revenue sharing and a cap. NBA mandates 50% of revenue go to the players(with the Bird rules, it goes WELL over 50%, but a minimium of 50%). NFL- Likewise, it's roughly 48.5%, and it balances out as there are floors, but if you understand the NFL Salary Cap, teams can spend 100M more in cash... as teams like the Saints have been doing for a while now... but eventually that evens out, so we'll just go with the CBA mandated MINIMIUM of 48.5% MLB-Players get 38-40% of MLB revenue as there's no cap and little revenue sharing. So players aren't making more. A FEW select players are getting massive deals. Most players in MLB have to wait until their 30-32 to become Free Agents, the better part of 7 seasons before they reach Free Agency. So the Dodgers can sign Ohtani to a 700M deal or the Mets can sign Soto to a 765M dollar deal, but overall, they're earning a smaller percentages of MLB Revenues. The only difference would be... the Dodgers wouldn't be able to stack their rotation with 5-6 30M AAV Starters and the Brewers or...Pirates would be able to afford to keep some of their stars.

Well, there would be no Green Bay Packers without the cap AND the revenue sharing. I think it's 100% accurate to say that. The Green Bay Packers got a check for 432.5M dollars to START the league year. That's before ANY other money is spent. They can compete at that point. It's not imagined and it's not possible without revenue sharing and salary cap. I also don't know what signs there are of demand waning for the NFL. The World Series had it's BEST rating since 2017 and it averaged 15.8M viewers. NFL games that are only available via streaming average 14.8M viewers. Average Sunday Noon Games average 21M. 49M people watched the NFL season opener. But lets compare the Super Bowl to the World Series. The pinnicale of each sport; Sunday’s Eagles-Chiefs Super Bowl 59 averaged a combined 41.7 rating and 127.7 million viewers across FOX, Tubi, Telemundo and Fox Deportes, surpassing Chiefs-49ers on CBS, Nickelodeon and Univision last year (123.7M) to rank as the largest Nielsen-estimated audience on record. That's compared to 15.8 for the World Series. Hell, the NFL Super Bowl Generates more money in ONE game than the NBA Finals and the World Series combined. I don't know what the point of this is. Poorly run teams haven't won so... ergo the salary cap hasn't helped them? That's a... kinda silly argument. Take the salary cap away and watch the Giants, Cowboys, Eagles, the Rams... the Bears, they'd just go out and buy the top players. Keeping Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay? You wouldn't be able to. It'd be like baseball. He'd sign his rookie contract and then hit the open market and he'd have made whatever ALL 30 teams would have deemed him worth. I'm kinda at a loss as to how you can look at the NFL's revenue sharing and Salary Cap and argue THAT hasn't contributed to the NFL's popularity. The NFL, the GAME would be dangerous without a salary cap. Imagine having an NFL team spending ~450 MILLION more than another team. How do you think that'd go? The NFL would have had to contract if not for the Mara and Rooney families and it'd be a joke.

Yes, it'll be messy. It'll probably mean a much shorter season in 2026. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing. One of the reasons the NFL has just blown past MLB is the inequality. We didn't have the Rooney and Mara's to help ensure the future of the sport...

That makes sense, but we're also in a reality in which it sounds like Giannis is going to be the primary PG this year... so I really don't know what that means for PT or a rotation. Are we going with a big lineup or is this just a way to get Trent and Porter on the floor with Giannis, Turner and I still assume Kuzma? Or Green actually. I'd prefer to see him get more PT. I'm not quite giving up on the Bucks, but I'm also about half checked out. I don't trust Doc... or frankly this organization. They are the antithesis of the Brewers. They don't develop young players. I think Beauchamp had all the tools to be a contributor, I think Jackson Jr is a guy who plays ugly but is effective. I'd almost prefer AJJ over Kuzma. But, that's getting off-topic. I just hope we can shine that turd up enough that we can get him shooting 40%+ with Giannis attacking and maybe we can deal him.

I think people are WAY too down on his MLB potential. I think it's very clearly capped as a utility player, but I think he can be a pretty solid player in that role. A very good defender and a guy who slap the ball around and take some walks. I feel like we have a pretty good grasp of his upside and because of that, I'm good with this. I'd MUCH rather trade someone like him than even Quintana or Anderson, young IFA who aren't even 19 yet.

To your first point, no, it doesn't. Doing more with less doesn't make me want less. And to the second, that's a good piece of leverage, though... I don't think there should be a "cap" on teams who are spending up against the cap. If the Dodgers can charge 5K per ticket and sell 55,000 tickets and make 800M a year on a 250M cap, they should be able to do so... IMO. The spending floor and caps on teams like Pitt are more important to me.

Kuzma... doesn't inspire a ton of confidence(to put it mildly) but I can't imagine we'd have been able to sign Turner and keep Portis without that trade. I don't like that we gave up AJ Johnson, but... that's over with. So if it's now or later in the year, he's a trade chip. It doesn't all have to happen now...right? Kuminga is a really interesting target, but I'd really hold off on dealing that until Giannis extends or doesn't.

Yeah... but that's a paltry sum when talking about signing a couple of HS prospects. They've stayed within the bonus the last two years and that's fine. They're willing to spend the money. I'd be a bit bothered if they were skimping here. Their payroll is already lower... but they've been doing a great job at continuing to add talent to the system. So I'm alright with that. But it doesn't seem like it's a factor. IIRC last year they were pretty much in the same situation. Made very aggressive offers, kids just turned them down.

Ok...well, if you say he was the 17th, I'll take your word for it, but yes, I would have. I'd have felt BETTER about it knowing you're going to be able to make the QO and get a pick right after the first round, so... yeah, it wouldn't have been the EXACT same scenario. Now he's a top 100 prospect as a starting pitcher for a guy who... probably costs that+ and hasn't hit particularly well away from AZ. Hell, if you're talking about before this year, he hadn't hit that well in the last 3-4 years. What? The CUBS "overpay, beat us for division, we lost WC series... Rinse and repeat." Are you of the belief the Brewers have been finishing behind the Cubs after they've overpaid and that's been happening over and over? They've won one Division Title since 2017 and that was in the strike shortened year. We've won the division 4 times in that stretch and we're in 1st this year(Which...would make 5). So... yeah, that hasn't been "rinse and repeat."

Been a wild run here. NVDA, AMD, AVGO, SMCI...TSM up and down the AI infrastructure is going wild(except for the first start ASML). It's just been an insane turnaround since April. Retirement age moving a couple decades back and forth. I suppose it was kinda obvious when he took off most export controls and opened it up(which...I may not agree with, but what the hell, I'm going to enjoy if nothing else).

... well...yeah, obviously. I think that's all of it. We find out Yount died, I'd HOPE most of them wouldn't troll us on Twitter. And I think most Brewers fans of a certain age have a level of respect for Sandberg.

I have no idea who we're talking about here. What top 100 prospect did we trade for to play 3rd? I could be missing it, but... we tried Dunn there, then Durbin there, neither sniffed the top 100. Maybe Dunn was close at one point, but not that I recall. Durbin wasn't even top 30 for the Yankees. I might be missing someone really obvious, but I don't think we traded for a top 100 to play 3rd. Ortiz and Turang were top 100 and then Hoskins and Yelich made the lineup look solid, but 3B was the question. Durbin has been a very good answer there either way.

I mean... one of the question marks is he's a 2 pitch pitcher with a good Fastball... but without great velo and a good slider. I could see him being 95-97 out of the pen and then the slider. But my guess would be is it's too early, they wanted him to keep developing and that will happen later in the year. It's not like our BP is falling apart, but that's a move I would expect to happen in the near future. I'm still really hoping they don't deal him for a rental, but... that's where I think this could be headed.

I'm actually seeing Brewers fans lay off Cubs fans on Twitter... Sad to see. I remember actually being a fan back when we hated the other Chicago team and constantly got into brawls with them and the Cubs were just generally bad.

Lions injury luck is... not getting better. Someone asked how have the Lions improved and I just thought about Hutchinson and McNiel and... so many guys they have who were hurt last year.

And Jansen an .864 OPS over that same period. One of the players most expected to go. I'm a bit confused as to how this was a huge overpay. If you're assuming Made and Pena were on their way up to HiA... where was he going to play? I don't think Pratt is moving up yet. I'd leave him in AA until the end of the year and get some AAA PAs late.

LOL... upon asking me to leave you alone... you again quoted me and engaged and you're again whining about it. Scroll up bud!