BrewerFan

I don't think WR or even CB for that matter is a bigger need. The impact Croby or Garrett could have...if Van Ness breaks out or if Gary plays like he has in the past, those aren't reasons to not trade for him, they're just more reasons TO trade for him. A front that would be THAT overwhelmingly dominant? You have to. Crosby would be my first choice...and I don't think you have to pay him 30M a year, but he's younger(2 years younger than Garrett) and...yeah, I'd happily throw him 30M. These two additions wouldn't be Reggie White like...but they wouldn't be far off. Two APs at arguably the 2nd most important position? The only player I'd prefer in the NFL right now over these two would be Dexter Lawrence and the NYG aren't dumb enough to trade him. Just hypothetically, lets say LVN breaks out and he's what Gary has been the last 2-3 years when healthy. On that same note, Gary also bounces back. How do you block that DL? You have Wyatt/Clark(who also struggled) in the middle. Remember when the Buccs just overwhelmed teams with their pass rush and beat the brakes off Mahomes? That's the type of front you'd have. You don't NEED elite cover corners if you've got that type of front. I mean, you obviously still want them and try and acquire them, but it makes the game so much easier for the rest of the defense. There are few players worth multiple 1sts. Those two. Dexter Lawrence... those are players you hand out 2 1sts for and you pay them(though both still have 2 and 3 years on their deals, so a new contract wouldn't be as burdensome).

In other news, Google barely misses on it's cloud and is down 7-8%. For a company that's already the cheapest of the Trillion dollar stocks, getting in at ~190 doesn't seem to bad. Also, increase their AI CapEx ~30% from 57.5B to 75-80B. That's likely why they fell also. I didn't hear what they said about missing on Cloud. MSFT said they missed because they simply didn't have the capacity to take on more customers. I would think with all the Cloud demand and two of the largest cloud providers coming up short, AWS either follows suit and they see a substantial sell off or AWS beats by quite a bit and they get a little bump(they're already pretty expensive, so hard to see a big jump for them). Might be a good stock to sell before earnings given their valuation, but I'll hold on.

LOL...of course it was because of ChatCCP. NVDA trades sideways for 4-5 months after the timeline for the Blackwell delay becomes more clear and then it dumps 18% on the same day and you don't think it's related? The entire sector was down. It was NOT just a natural sell-off. It's the largest sell-off ever, so....no, not natural. It was built on this myth that DeepSeek cost 5.6M(despite running on 50,000 H100 GPUs). The premise is that hyperscalers like META, MSFT, Alphabet, and TSLA may reign in their AI CapEx. Well, they've all had earnings, being the hyperscalers like META, MSFT, Alphabet, TSLA, they may reign in their AI CapEx. Well, they've all had earnings and they're not doing that, but built into NVDA's price is the fact that they're supply-constrained. TSMC can't produce enough of their Blacwell GPUs. If the argument is they can just sell their lower end chips, that's be extremely bearish for NVDA. That's half the revenue as the GB200 stacks(or less). Why would that push the stock up? No, AMD is not close to doing what NVDA is doing. AMD is hasn't closed the gap at all. Though it is getting cheap enough...I may pick up 1000-2000 shares. The relevance from this announcement would have been that companies didn't need to buy nearly as much NVDA GPUs. That was not and is not baked into the price. Luckily that's not proven true this past week, but that was very clearly the reason NVDA, AVGO...TSM dumped from ~220 to under 200. Any business related to GPUs dumped upon this announcement, even those who are about as rock solid(such as TSM). TSM had also came out and said they expect 100% AI growth this year. Given NVDA is by far their biggest customer, that's why they were touching 150 shortly before this panic sell-off and were down to 110 pre-market Monday. Yes. It's also odd that just a couple days after DeepSeek or ChatCCP is released, China would announce a 1T Yuan investment in AI(140B USD). I mean...if they can build DeepSeek for 5.6M, why on Earth would they invest THAT type of money into their own AI? It...just doesn't make sense, does it? But it's exactly as you said, they purchase from 3rd parties and they can't admit that. Of course, Trump announcing 25%-100% Tariffs on TSMC in an attempt to try and get them to manufacture in the US...at a time when they're building or already built four new Fabs in the US was a bit of a 1-2 punch. Couple that with the fact that they've been trading sideways for the last ~6 months Earnings should have calmed the fears and now AVGO and NVDA should go back up on their own earnings reports. I think some of the more ambitious price targets of 200 or 220 are a little silly, but 175 is a pretty reasonable target. NVDA and AVGO are still the #1 and #2(at least according to Morgan Stanley).

Yes, but you said; That's a bit different than tariffs having no or having a minimal impact. I'm also just trying to shake off the "Lumber is a very, very small part of the cost of building a house." Not in Wisconsin. I'm in the process right now, and lumber is over 200K. That's either 250K, or Canada has to do a little dance because there is a trade deficit. I'm not entirely sure how you have ~1/4th of the GDP and expect to have no trade deficits, but that's how we're keeping score now... Either way, housing is VERY much impacted by these proposed tariffs. Ok, lets follow this logic. So nobody buys new cars(not great for one our largest industry or those UAW) but...fine. What do you suppose happens to the cost of used cars? They don't go down, right? Now if everyone forgoes new cars and looks to used cars? I was just looking at Trucks last year. The new Toyota Tundra Hybrids. Brand new they were 70-85 depending on the model. The used from the previous two years were selling for ~63-70 because they was a limited supply. You're just shifting where the costs are going to rise. But you're losing jobs(and estimated 165K) if this goes through and it's a massive tax increase. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2025/02/03/tariffs-will-raise-prices-of-new-cars-spark-layoffs/78186463007/ And this is just housing and cars/trucks. What's the cost of mass food deportations? Or tariffs on things like avocados? It's next to impossible to guess what he's going to do. What's pretty easy to figure out however...is that this is going to be inflationary despite what anyone else says. Hard to brush this off as some menial increase...it won't be....IF he goes through with it. And then next up is Europe...which should be Congress, but who knows what he'll use to circumvent Congressional powers in order to declare a state of emergency in Europe. Maybe the War in Ukraine(which was so easy, I thought that'd be over on his first day in office).

Trump was confronted with the fact that to deport 1 million people a year, it would cost roughly a trillion dollars a year and he still argued it'd save money. You think 80 Billions dollars is going to get him to retreat from that position? Hard to see that happening. Second, your source did NOT say "Tariffs don't cause inflation." They said the source said specifically the tariffs, introduced the previous 5 years did not cause inflation(then clarifying that they actually did; it was just negligible). They are new...unless you can tell me when we've threatened to impose 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico(which I think is in violation of NFTA...or USMCA...which is pretty much the same). But that's certainly new. Putting 25% to 100% Tariffs on Taiwan, namely semiconductors, that's new. The deportations in which they're taking Puerto Rican and Native American's or Mexican American Citizens who speak English...pretty sure that's new(and I'd guess a massive lawsuit). I suppose Tariffs on the scale that Trump's talking about are not new. We tried them under Hoover and they kick started the great depression, so that's a new thing to try again, but most of it is very much new.

-I think having a big play guy opens up the field and makes things a LOT easier. Wicks is that Davante Adams-type guy. He struggled badly with drops last year. His last 4 years and these are rough numbers from week 12 or something, but in his junior year in College, his drop rate was like 4.8%, his senior year, it was 27%, Rookie year, 4%, 2nd year, 28%. But I think he's going to be the guy who keeps the sticks moving. Metcalf, or taking the top off, IS like Watson, and our offense is much-much better with Watson on the field, even when he's not making big plays. The coverage change. You have to play a safety over the top of him. You have Wicks, Doubs, Jayden Reed, AND then you have Kraft, completely believe in Musgraves ability to create mismatches. -Walker? He's not worth anywhere near 16M. If you can get him and Cooper on the field, I think they could do a lot of fun things, but no. He's had some flashes, and I think he's an easier target, but there should be zero hesitation in turning down that 5th-year option. If he plays well...I still can't see him earning that option. Wyatt, 5th-year option. If he plays well...I still can't see him earning that option. Wyatt, on the other hand, I think he'll be worth it, but it's a little tougher as he really hasn't broken out yet. Started last year strong, got hurt, and then was sporadic down the stretch. I don't think you need to go and sign a Baun or Wagner. Bring back McDuffie or Wilson for another year. I remain very skeptical about Hopper. Didn't like him as a 3rd rd pick, but hopefully, he'll be surprised this year. Our LBs get much better with the DL, I think people are overlooking what Slaton brings to the defense, though. I don't think they're as easy to replace as you're suggesting. He's the only guy who was consistently holding off double teams and not being moved at the point. 3/24 really isn't much for what'll likely be another pretty solid cap increase. I think 280-285 is fairly likely(Which would put us closer to 60M). -Center I think this is going to be a really good draft for Centers, they're just not guys who played Center last year. Mbow from Purdue and Grey Zabel, NDSU are both guys who I think will be really good centers. Conerly Jr could play Center, though...he could also play OT or OG. all three would be great 2nd rd picks IMO. The big moves...I just wouldn't move Jaire. I'd target CB early, but I'd ride with him one more year. He really isn't that expensive given what he provides...when he's on the field. Other than that, if they move on from Jaire, DJ Reed obviously. Asante Samuel Jr would be the high-upside signingsigning. He's the most talented. Adebo was a good one. Ernest Jones or Shermwood from the Jets at MLB. Both are good vs the run. DT-Onwuzurike...I guess and BJ Hill could be short-term reinforcements. OL-Drew Dalman from ATL would be the #1 target just for the Packers. Get Center squared away. That of course assumes we go back to more of a mix of a ZBS and a Gap running team next year. I think as good as Josh Jacobs was the changes we made in our offense hurt Love. All the PA we ran off the outside zone. We still have Lloyd coming back next year after a lost rookie year. Teven Jenkins-I think he'd be a nice fit. Can play OT and OG. Plus it'd be nice to take a player from another NFCN team. There's not much in free agency though. I'd be just as happy mostly holding pat and "only" adding Calais Campbell or someone like that. I don't get why he signs so cheap when he's such a reliably good player. The over-the-top unlikely, but most impactful move would be the same two-edge rushers talked about last year, Maxx Crosby or Myles Garrett. I'm taking Crosby due to age, but Garrett would probably be the 2nd biggest off-season move in Packer history behind Reggie. Problem is, If I was the Browns or the Raiders, I'd want a 1st at least and then I'd start by asking for a 2nd 1st and probably settle on a couple picks. A 1st, 3rd, maybe a '26 4th. You'd have to really think you were ready to win. Either way, I'm still looking for talent on the OL/DL. Rasheed Walker is just...competent, but not good. Sean Rhyan is a well below-average guard. Myers was a bad center. DL-I don't know how exactly to fix it... I'm really hopeful Covington will as we've just got too many resources invested and the OLs in the division are too good. Detroit-Among the best in the league. Minn has two really good OT Chicago has Wright and I imagine they'll add a guy like Campbell. We're just not good enough on either side and we seldom get a top 10 pick to get a real blue chip, immediate-impact talent. The Eagles or the 49ers from the past few years, that should continue to be what the Packers strive for....obviously. Easier said than done. ,

We have the cap space(~40M is the number I've seen), but I think that number is misleading, or needs context. I think every NFCN team has more cap space. . We've got a really young team, but with that...obviously you'll need to extend players. Zach Tom is a guy we have to get done. I'd guess 4/100 is the starting point. It's always easier if you can roll that remaining year into it. 5/102 or whatever would be ideal. 40 SB. Get that position locked down. I think Slaton is going to be more in the 3-years 24M type range. I don't know if he's worth that or not. He's coming off a down year by PFF standards, but a big guy who can play the run...I'd be very surprised to see him get 3.5 over two years. Godwin is nice, but if you're spending 25M a year, I'd rather go after a guy who compliments this offense more. That's DK Metcalf or another guy with elite speed. Garrett Wilson would be a great choice as well(I'd love is Rodgers burns that bridge in NY) though I don't know what the cost would be. Should probably be a 1st, but then you're also going to have to pay him. He's the most talented potential addition...IMO. In the draft, Mbow, the OT from Purdue or Zabel(voted best player at the Sr Bowl) are two guys I think could come in and start at center right away. Both are definitely Packers type players given their versatility. If you don't find a CB in Rd1 who you like, I'd move back 10-15 spots in this draft. I'd hold onto Jaire for another year. I don't think it's smart to try and rebuild that whole CB group. I have no doubt if we could do it over again, we'd have made a move for Mitchell last year when he got past #20. Philly was able to add two rookies who slid right in at CB, but they also had Darius Slay and then a front that was dominant. I'd prioritize the draft as follows DT, OL(I don't care which positions, but you need a better center than we have and I would expect Morgan to be much better in Yr2) and obviously CB. I'm all for Morrison in the 1st if he grades out well enough. Someone like Kenneth Grant could be a great addition. BUT, if there were a trade, for instance, Chicago wanted to move up, I'd gladly trade #23 for #42+#44. Pick up one of those OL and and a guy like Deone Walker. He's a freak who also dominated the Sr. Bowl, he plays hard and has rare physical traits. He won't test like Jordan Davis, but he may have better get off and short area quickness.

I think it was obviously Giannis. The Mavs GM talked about how you need an athletic big who can defend to win...that's As for Cuban, he sold most of the Mavs. He's a minority owner... but, he still owns enough that you think he was either removed from this conversation or he was opposed. What else can possibly be going on here? Does Buss have something on the Dallas owners?

Yeah...I suppose Gary Payton saying, "I don't want to play in Milwaukee," makes that a little more comparable. They reportedly approached another team about a Luka trade first. Some are suggesting it was Milwaukee. Just for the sake of argument...what would we think about that? You get a younger star and more of a timeline to compete. This is almost like the Kareem trade if Kareem didn't want to be traded.

I know we don't talk about other trades on this board a lot, but this is such a shocking trade it feels like it deserves a thread. The Mavs...coming off an NBA Finals with a 25-year-old Larry Bird-esque talent, just traded him and Kleber to the Lakers for a 31-year-old big with a pretty substantial injury history...both turn 26 and 32 later this season, but this is one of those paradigm-shifting trades that seems to mainly happen to the Lakers. Maybe David Stearns can come back and veto this nonsense. Luka and LeBron is going to be an elite pick 'n roll duo. Two 6'8 big wings who can pass like they can and score like they can? What in the hell was Dallas thinking? That 2029 1st worth that much? They already identify a Wemby-type player? (I don't know if that's sarcasm or just disbelief). If this was Giannis and he WANTED out I'd be upset, but I'd think he earned the right and that's a decent starting point I suppose. But Luka didn't want out from what I've read. They just really think this makes them better. Kyrie running the offense and AD manning the post.

I really think the Bucks best and only realistic course to winning a title would be to not make a big move. If they can, trade Portis for a more mobile big. They don't have to score as much, just a better defender and try and work Middleton back for the playoffs like you have the last two years and hope Dame and Giannis are healthy when you get there. The whole team for that matter. Jackson, Green, Lopez. I think their chances of winning it are obviously pretty low this year, but Middleton has been really good the last two years in the post-season. He hasn't been the problem. I'm not as concerned with the first 82 games as the next hopefully 16-28 games. Rollins looks pretty good, AJJ, I still think it'd be smart to have Beauchamp playing SOME minutes so you have bodies to throw at Tatum, Green, but that doesn't seem like it'll happen. Making a move just to make a move doesn't make sense given all the constraints we have. The likely marginal upgrade you get from Lavine....who is an outstanding player, but who needs the ball, that doesn't seem worth it. If there were a Jrue type player...that'd be great, but...obviously there isn't. Whatever we do, we can't possible make the worst trade of the season unless we trade Giannis for an older, injury prone player who doesn't make us better.

Yes. In a heartbeat(ignoring how you would acquire him). The guy plays hard, he wants to win, he's a good defender, he doesn't need the ball all the time. He's getting older and declining, but I like his on-court personality for a team like this.

Wouldn't 12M be a record for a catcher? Seems more likely they'll just decline and go back to arbitration. Either way, you have people on Twitter complaining about how the Brewers are "pinching pennies," here again like Burnes when...they're doing just the opposite. They're coming closer to Contreras number than the Brewers and they don't have to go through arbitration and talk about all the things he didn't do well enough. I'd guess his framing or defense would be on that list or...I don't know, it's not a big list, but that's how it goes.

And Norm and Uecker were friends.

Yeah...that or we just found enough stuff in the dumpster that you gotta stop complaining about it. I didn't like giving up a kid like Chambers, a young HS arm that we just signed for a guy who was being DFA'd... and yet Hudson was outstanding and seems to be a huge part of this pen. So maybe it's because we don't need "needle movers," or hell, maybe it's because most Brewers fans are realizing we an find them in the dumpster bin as well!

The argument that the Dodgers are going to pretty blatantly break the rules in order to get him to sign for less now is...a pretty big assumption. And if the Dodgers did that...assuming MLB found out, that'd be a pretty significant punishment. Negating the signing for one.

You're confusing a LOT of trade ideas with GOOD trade ideas. How long until we hit the "should we trade Chourio" discussion?

Yeah...I did. I didn't notice it was moved, but it was in the thread...in which he brings up trading Contreras and I'd guess If we can spare the 40 man spot, he'd be worth bringing on...but that was in response to Quero not being a lock at Catcher. I was both advocating Cartaya and agreeing Quero isn't a lock(though...nobody is).

Diego Cartaya was just DFA'ed...at 22. I'd claim him and give him some time...not sure where. I guess AA or AAA as the backup and in the OF?

I think you could make a pretty reasonable guess that it was any of the three teams, Balt, Boston or Toronto. Boston is where I'd have my money. They said they were putting together a final aggressive offer shortly after the Fried contract and the Mets signing Soto. Crochet and Burnes with their young lineup would have been pretty damn good...and they haven't been spending much recently, a disgruntled fanbase.

I wouldn't compare Burnes and Williams playoff meltdowns. Or Williams and Haders. Hader got beat by Freeman and Soto, two of the best hitters of their era. Williams just melted down and gave up a whole lot of runs. Couldn't the same be said about any pitcher? The argument can't be that he's been durable and dominant, so he's due...right? I don't know...but you seem to go with the 'I didn't want him anyway,' argument when an ex-Brewer gets a big deal upon leaving the Brewers. If we had an extra 35M, the Brewers may have been more inclined to give Burnes a deal after his 3rd year when he publicly talked about not having been offered an extension(though he said he'd have liked to) and we could have bought out his arbitration years+ 2-3 FA years and been paying him for just a couple more years. He got ~32M the last 3 years. 6 years 120M, 5/90. You'd be in the option years right now. OR...they could have 35M more and extend Contreras a couple more years or they could have signed Christian Walker, Goldschmidt. And maybe that money would be spent on a bad contract...just as some of the money we spend will be spent on bad deals as it is...the last year of Yelich contract. 35M more in payroll is a pretty hard thing to turn into a negative...and being the question to which you're responding to is about specifically, having 35M more to spend a year, if it's all on Burnes or not, we'd be better for it.

I'd guess at least half of those are on Williams. QBs can make an OLs "grades" so much better or so much worse...and obviously vice versa. I know we had good to elite pass-blocking grades when Billy Turner, Royce Newman and others were getting a lot of snaps after Bakhtiari got hurt. Josh Myers was one of the top graded pass blocking Centers in that period as well.. Pass Block Win/Loss rate has become one of the most meaningless stats IMO. Rodgers would get the ball out so quickly on so many pass attempts, those would go down as wins. Love is pretty good at this as well, though not where Rodgers was(a pretty high bar). But Williams is running around back there trying to play hero ball. He makes some incredible throws, but he plays undisciplined, erratic, doesn't take the easy pass. And he's still had a pretty damn good rookie year all things considered. That's why an offense where he gets a lot of easy reads, easy completions...that's kinda scary. Especially if they get a franchise LT in the top 10 picks. In fact, if I was Chicago, I'd use two of my top 3 picks(2 2nd rd picks) on the OL. I remain confident the Bears will blow it and the fan base will be clamoring for Arch Manning before long...

It's poor coaching. It absolutely has to be. That team is more talented than the Vikings...IMO and they're...what, 7 games behind in the standings. They've got 3 really good WRs, their OL isn't good, but it's not terrible. They're just always a poorly run mess. I'm terrified Ben Johnson is going to take that job in the off-season. Look at what he's done with Detroit and then give him a young QB like Williams, Odunze, DJ Moore, Keenan Allen, Kmet and a couple good backs? Plus, they'll have a top 10 pick. That has to be on an OT. Wright is a really good RT. But it's the Bears, so they'll probably hire a defensive minded HC and continue to let Caleb sink or swim on his own.

Yeah...I think people are WAY too down on Black. He's been moved around to suit where the big league team may need him. He can play a competent 2nd, 1st, OF. Everyone said he was improving at 3B and then Ortiz took over there and we had no need for him. He's a young top 100 prospect who really hasn't gotten a shot yet. Lets let it play out with him.

His agent has said he'd like to go to a small market team and that may give the Brewers an advantage. He caught a lot of heat from the Japanese media for wanting to come over here so early, he doesn't like the media. He prefers a quiet market(but he also hasn't really spoken in depth about his decision yet). So sure, I'd guess SD or Seattle based on that, but...it'd be pretty cool. And I'd think you could rebuild those relationships. I mean, whoever signs him, they'll presumably be in the same position.