BrewerFan

The Math is real simple IMO and I don't have to talk myself into it. They added Tucker for Bellinger/Suzuki(lets say one for the sake or argument), Paredes and Wesneski just for next years team. They also traded away the 14th pick in the draft from last year, the #1 prospect in the Astros organization now. They added...maybe2 WAR to next years team. Tucker is a top ~10 hitter in Baseball. I also don't think he makes the Cubs much better next year. Both of those things can be true. It's not Fantasy Baseball. Maybe they make another trade and move Busch so Bellinger can play 1B. But then they still have to try and move Suzuki...who has a NTC. Or they can play Bellinger in CF and I'm not sure what happens to PCA in that scenario...but they added to the strength of their team for a player who'll likely net them a comp pick in a year. I don't think that's worth what they gave up. If you think they're a playoff team, then fine. The upgrade might actually make a difference. I agree with @sveumrules...how good of a trade it is will depend on any extension. I could also change my mind based on other signings. If the trade rumors are true and they're dealing another top 100 prospect+ for a pitcher who is extremely erratic...eh, just not a team that really scares me.

I think it's really dumb on the Cubs behalf. I do think the period they have to extend him is very relevant. So relevant, it's what makes or breaks the trade. They're going to have to trade at least one of Bellinger or Haap or Suzuki? And the gap between them isn't THAT big. If they extend him, fine, but if Soto is getting 765 and up to 830 with 75M up front, Tucker is certainly worth 400M over 12 years or so. 300 would be a great deal, not a discount.

They have new owners, so if they're going to keep Gunnnar, Adley, Jackson Holliday, they have a BIG window and then fine. I don't know if they will though. Also...how does Max Fried get 218M? I guess maybe Burnes is just gonna get that much money. The 7/200 projections(that were always low) must be closer to Cole type numbers now. A year younger, pretty similar, but Burnes has been healthier and he's a little more dominant when both are on.

Oh...well, they were right. Some of these posts are stating things as facts because we just don't think it will happen, but if you actually have a reason, I will keep that in mind. And clearly you were right. Looking at what they got, the Brewers probably got out real quick. I actually get the price going up since the deadline. I didn't think he had all that much use to us at the deadline. Now, he's thrown a full year and a team can limit his innings, but he's pretty much going to be able to handle a full workload next year. That's with the Brewers. He's athletic and if he can hit, I think teams will want him. I think he's got positions, they're just positions the Brewers have depth and talent at. He's athletic. You can play in the OF if you're athletic(especially if you were happy running Eloy out there). 1B I'd imagine. If his skills at 2B/3B are below par for the Brewers or even for a team like the Sox, I'd think he could play 1B. He's young, athletic and has hit at every level. There's still value there. Yeah, I did say I don't think he's got much value. Maybe some as a 1st rd pick, but not much.

Maybe...or maybe this is just how the Brewers do things. How they've always done things. Seldom are any big moves the Brewers make telegraphed. Even when they trade players away, it's surprising but not surprising. They made moves last year that made it appear they were going to try and compete and then traded Burnes when we assumed he'd be around. Hader was out of nowhere, Cain, Yelich. Any one player is going to be a longshot. I don't think being left out of one article means we're in or not. As for your proposal, I really like Lara and that's 4 good prospects, but for a guy who's open to an extension? Say 3/60 with a couple TO? I'd do that and I'd add a little if you could get an agreement done. So take the ~2.9M he's projected to make, 7M for next year and then add the 3 years. 5/70, 10M SB to entice him(which would probably make it harder but worth it). For that, I'd be on board. But we don't even know if they're actually in it or not.

I don't know that it is true. I don't know the current system does maximize the revenue for players. I don't know what % of revenue is going to the players this year, but it'd been trending down for a while, even with the massive money spent by the top few teams, it was ~38%, 39% of revenue was spent on players. NFL, NBA, NHL, they get 48%-51% of revenue. But those leagues, the NFL in particular, they take all that TV money, put it in one pot and each team gets a check at the start of the year. That check is enough to cover the Packers operating expenses for the year. Maybe not in a year in which they go nuts with signing bonuses or basically circumvent the cap...but plenty to cover the salary cap and then some. This was Bud Selig's mission as commissioner, and he did some good work. Some of it is pretty gimmicky. The comp picks, whatever. He did increase revenue sharing...but it's not remotely similar to the other leagues. For now, the Brewers are competing by just doing more with less and their player development, and that can make it almost more fun at times...or maybe that's just rationalization, but it's better than calling the Brewers cheap constantly or pretending the chasm doesn't exist.

My man...they're doing this to dump salary. But in this scenario, they take back 22M in GTD salary Hoskins is owed. So take the ~64M they owe Arrenado and subtract that. And then they give away Jordan Walker...who you want for a reason and they trade him as well. And their return is a bad contract, a guy who was a FA MiLB pitcher and Tyler Black who...he's nice, but only save a little money this year and get back that package? In a rebuilding year?

Walker can play 1B. He's a capable defender at 3rd, he just hasn't because of Arrenado. I don't think the Cardinals even consider this deal. Walker needs regular playing time. He's still got massive upside. Arrenado is still a good 3B and with the Rox paying part of his deal(I think it's 10M over the next 3 years) you get him for 3/64 and you're giving up 22M in GTD salary in return? This is the most no-brainer trade of all time. Arrenado is not 3 and 42. We'd give him that. Walker is definitely worth acquiring.

Well, they liked him enough to draft him out of HS. I don't want to give up the prospects it'd likely take either. The Mets and Yankees are the favorites but the Mets system seems to be a much better fit than the Yankees.

I don't think you can take Black, throw in 5 guys who are not really prospects and make the deal, but why wouldn't they have interest in a top 100 prospect who has...virtually no service time? Wilken value is going to be in his power and ability to get on base. They're devoid of talent. I'd guess they'd willing to take whatever the best prospects rather than filling holes in their lineup. This is a team that lost...101 and 121 games the last two years. They're in a complete rebuild. Just take the talent. I'm sure they'd want Pratt or Made. I don't know how to guess how they'd value Misiorowski vs Pratt vs a 17-year-old Made. This is the same organization that traded Tatis Jr at 17, so may not want to build a trade around a kid that young.

Yeah, I guess that's true, but so many of their players are guys who just not eligible for prospect status, but still have 6 years there...like Holliday, Kjestad, Cowser, Westburg... I have to say, if they need to use Mountcastle to free up money...as a fan, I'd be so disappointed. That may be the route they go, it has been for a long time, but these new owners should really be willing to spend. I'd be looking at the next 3-4 years as a legitimate shot at winning a WS. Re-sign Burnes, look to trade for another arm maybe, C: Adley Rutschman 1B: Ryan Mountcastle, Ryan O'Hearn/Mayo 2B: Jackson Holliday SS: Gunnar Henderson 3B: Jordan Westburg/Mayo OF: Cedric Mullins, O'Neill, Colton Cowser DH: Heston Kjerstad, O'Hearn That is a stacked lineup. I think Holliday breaks out this year. How are they letting Burnes walk without a fight? They'll have a cheaper payroll that the Brewers. You've got the chance to win 2-3 WS. Perhaps they'll come out and announce big extensions for Holliday, Adley, Gunnar, but I suspect all of those will be more difficult now with the size of these contracts for a guy in his mid 20s. I feel like 10/500 is the new 10/300 for a superstar like Gunnar...so might as well just go for it now!

Willy put up 3.3 WAR in that 2023 season. 3.0 if you want to use Bref(3.1 this year). Prior to that he'd put up a 4.3, 4.2, 1.9 and 3.9 WAR...so the record of success is pretty strong. Main different in Willy last year was a career-low low BABIP. xwOBA was .335, 2nd highest of his career. Either way...he was worth the QO and I doubt the Brewers don't offer it.

LOL...yes, this is OBVIOUSLY a part of being a Brewers fan. It's almost a badge of honor. We have to do it by being smarter and better run. But everything you're describing is evidence of the initial statement. The original post didn't comment on SHOULD the Brewers sign Adames, is he the 3rd best defensive SS(and I just simply do NOT think Adames went from fringe GG caliber defender to a very poor defender, I think that was the result of playing between two other SS, but particularly Ortiz as he got to balls that Adames otherwise would have which would have helped his metrics. And then he went through a bumpy stretch with some errant throws. No longer term trend. No. Giannis in MLB terms is pretty much Juan Soto. He'd be so comically priced out of Milwaukee, we'd Giannis is basically Juan Soto. Again, the guy who JUST got more money in one contract than our owners net worth? Also...absolutely nobody said he was. Probably more like...Brook Lopez, a guy we had to bid against the Rockets to give ~50M over 2 years. Was the point that if the player isn't a top 20-25 player of all-time and a transformative player, they're not a "data point?" -Not every Free Agent should be re-signed by Milwaukee? How...it's like you're entirely new to the sport and this stuff needs to be explained. It's not that we don't re-sign EVERY elite Free Agent like the Packers do or the Bucks do...provided they want to, it's that we cannot afford to sign ANY of them given the massive fiscal inequalities in the game. I'm just confused how that point can be disputed because you're arguing that Adames won't be worth his deal at the end of it. That's just confirming how you've framed ALL of this in the small market Brewers perspective. In every other sport, you can eat that money and be fine. That Aaron Rodgers that you claim we had to trade due to the cap(which we didn't). He cost more trading him with respect to the cap. We had ~70 MILLION in dead cap last year. That's basically the NFL equivalent of the bad years of a players contract. The Angels with Pujols and Hamilton, the Tigers with Miggy, whatever. Aaron Jones? He's got a higher dead cap than all the money we Guaranteed to Josh Jacobs this year. Keeping him was about 8M vs the cap CHEAPER(and he was at the very least arguably better as a player, just older...and we have plenty of cap, we could have kept both, purely from a financial aspect). This year we have 65M in dead cap. The Bucks and Packers have been among the highest spenders in their respective leagues. The Packers spent ~340M on players a couple years ago. 100M over that years cap by using voids and the like. The Bucks are...without looking behind MAYBE 3 teams in total salary. All Data Points in the difference between MLB and the other major sports leagues.

Yeah, I mean, end of '26 isn't crazy. You see what people are saying about him. I'd argue back against the # of players who played at that age(he'd be 19 going on 20)...maybe we got one. But the great thing is, these aren't the days of Antoine Williamson or...whoever the hell. We have Cooper Pratt, Luis Pena, we have SO many other guys with high ceilings. The dream isn't in finding another star...IMO. I think we'll do that. It's in hitting on a couple and then just good solid players as these guys move up. Bitonti doesn't have to be a 30HR hitter, if he can hit .225 with a .325 OBP, hit 25 HRs and play great D at 1B, fine(or 3B). We just have so many options AND we're stacking these LA classes on each other. It's just a whole different era in Brewers baseball. The point is, we're not counting on it being Made, Pratt, Quero...and we don't have to rush them. It's also December 10th and Juan Soto is now worth more than the Principal owner of the Brewers is worth, so nothing wrong with being a little overly optimistic on the young guns!

What for? Devin Williams as a hedge against Bautista? Give them another HL reliever? He should be back and healthy for next year, but it's a walk year for Williams. He may be willing to be a lights out SU man on a contender for a year. The two systems don't really match up as neither has MLB ready arms save for Misiorowski, so it'd be a tough sell to get, but Mayo may be the guy who replaces Mountcastle.

That's...very optimistic! I'd be thrilled with a year split between A ball. Maybe he gets into the playoffs in AA. Then a year in AA. And then if he's on the route Chourio is, 8/80+2 team options. That is assuming SO much between then and now, but it's fun to think about. I don't think I'd want a rookie young(or 2nd/3rd year Yount) on this iteration of the Brewers. That was before you had to worry about service time and the Brewers were bad. They were building for something. This team is trying to COMPETE for everything.

Fair enough...we don't need to talk about it, but we don't need to pretend it doesn't exist while the Dodgers COULD spend nearly 1.5B(combined) on two players in back-to-back years(even though I don't think Soto chooses to sign with them). But the part in bold is all the Brewers can realistically address and the next 6-7 look to be very competitive as well.

No...to either. Neither player was let go because the Packers financially could not afford to pay their salary OR because they couldn't afford either player. Yeah, I don't really know how this argument can be made, but...sure. The Brewers couldn't afford it, but it's not a data point to support that baseball continues to be the one major sport where small market teams lose their stars? I'm not sure how it's NOT a data point, but...alright.

The comment plainly was not specific to Adames. I'm genuinely confused as to why this is a difficult concept.

You're really stretching to willfully miss the point here for...some strange reason. -Yeah, NFL teams lose players to the salary cap. They're still all playing on a level field, right? Who was the last player the Packers lost that they wanted to keep because of cap? That's a team that plays in a market of 100K people. -I don't care how Hader did last year as I said in the previous post. -Prince Fielder didn't sign with the Rangers, he signed with the Tigers, he was outstanding, he got hurt and the Rangers had his contract insured...though I'm not even sure why he's being brought up? You not minding how MLB is structured...in absolutely no way changes the ridiculous inequities in how MLB is structured toward other leagues. David Bakhtiari was injured and couldn't play most of the 4 years after signing the largest deal for an OL in NFL history. Does that in ANY WAY dispute the original point? I also very specifically said; And you responded by...talking about why they weren't great deals for...whatever reason.

The comment was made that Baseball is the only major sport in which small-market teams are EXPECTED to lose their stars to large-market teams. Not about about being "victims," because they couldn't sign Willy Adames to this exact deal, it was a larger and pretty simple point. The Packers aren't expected to just...let any player they draft who they hit on leaves because they can't possibly match the Cowboys, Giants, Rams, etc... The Bucks, again, they didn't just reconcile themselves to the fact that Giannis was gone when he became a star because they just couldn't consider spending the money to keep them. So no part of this statement; ...is wrong. Hader, Burnes, Williams. You can rationalize why each individual deal wasn't a great deal...and that's not the point.

Doesn't change his post in any way.

Awfully low bar. This isn't 5 kids playing baseball in the yard, this is MLB. You can use a real runner. Speaking of which, that's the one I don't like. The guy starting on 2B in extras.

I love those, the shift. Replay has been good. There are a few very small aspects of replay I don't love, but on balance it's a huge success. Eliminating the shift(or limiting it) has been great. This would just...skew the game too much. You'd also see the best hitters getting paid more. Imagine getting Soto out and then you have to face him again 2 hitters later with 2 on or the bases loaded. Just...an asinine idea.

I thought Montas would be a nice guy to bring back on...2/15 maybe. He throws in the upper 90s, obviously the Brewers liked him and probably thought they could get more out of him, but 17M over 2 years? Insane. @Team Canada...that's the most absurd idea I think I've heard discussed. If you did do that...I'd imagine Soto's value would go up significantly. Bases loaded, big spot, he may be the player I want up more than anyone else in the game.