Matt Breen

If they intend to trade him, that would be pretty stupid... I guess Scherzer was scratched from his last start. Nothing serious. But they may feel that showing he is healthy is to their advantage.

While that's certainly a possibility - I would add that the team has set themselves up to trade Rodgers if the situation presents itself. If the team feels Love is ready, they can trade Rodgers and move on to the much cheaper Love. Plus add some draft picks and/or players to the mix. They can do this whether Rodgers wants to be traded or not.

Nice pick up. I would have preferred Gallo, but this was solid. Especially for the price.

Noooo! Not Cooper Hummel. Well, Clancy, he'll likely get a better chance to play in AZ - and we will get a better chance to see if your faith in him was merited.

Well, I’m certainly on the record as stating that Bowden is a doofus, but if this is legitimate, then no one can say they’re not seriously looking. Still doesn’t mean there’ll be a deal, though. Bowden is - honestly - usually really bad. It's sort of amazing he was a GM.

Watched the full presser, and I think Rodgers came across about as well as he could have. He answered the questions. Didn't duck stuff. Said he's here and fully committed to 2021. Loves the team and the city and so forth. All good stuff. However, we tend to focus on weirder stuff and that's all anyone talks about. But there was a lot more than talking about Jordy Nelson. That was one part of a much larger discussion. I think one big thing was not that all those guys mentioned should (or could) have been re-signed - but that there were some mistakes and missed opportunities. And he feels that - in his position - he can help the team avoid some of those mistakes in the future. It's a slippery road. When is a 'suggestion' really a demand. That sort of thing. But maybe they can actually forge in way to make things work. I hope so. In the end, I think that - after winning the MVP - Rodgers thought the team would want to build around him for the next few years. And thus he offered up ways to do that. And when the team ignored all those suggestions - well, it made him feel as if his days were numbered. It is what it is. Rodgers has a limited time frame to play, and I do not doubt he wants to maximize those years. I hope they all come to a good place - and we just go out and win.

Yeah, many of these guys left because of the salary cap. We simply didn't have the room to sign them all. It wasn't like we didn't want Lindsey or Lang or whomever. They just got a lot more money than we could afford. It's part of the way things work.

A $400 toaster! Sweet. That must make some awesome crusty bread. I bet bagels as well. And not just two at a time. Like 6 or 8 pieces. And the brown is really even. I hate toasters that have hot spots, so certain parts of the bread are way more toasted than others.

It's obvious Rodgers is seeing things through the prism of a player with his discussion about players we have lost. As people have noted, there's a reason guys go. Does Jordy Nelson want to be the 4th WR? And does the team want to spend a roster spot - even on the cheap - for a guy like him as opposed to a younger guy who has the potential to be a much greater contributor? The upside of Nelson (or whomever) is limited as an older player. Yes, he might contribute. Yes, he might be a valued mentor and so forth. But then we have to give up someone in his place. There's a trade off there. Not to mention the potential grumbling of other players (and fans) when the guy doesn't play much. Plus the expectation of the player comes into play. It's hard for guys who have started their whole lives to watch from the bench. I'm sure many of them will say they are okay with it - yet they'll stew on the sidelines when the 4th round pick gets their reps. Does a team want to deal with that? And there's also the honesty factor. Many older players refuse to believe they have lost it. Coaches don't need a guy who - while he can still contribute - believes they should be playing over other guys. It's just hard. That's why management can be difficult. They have to make tough calls. And it's not easy - for anyone. Staying detached - so you're not playing favorites - is a way to deal with things objectively. On the flip side of all this, I don't have a problem with the team discussing potential moves with key players. I mean, to understand how letting a player walk (or adding a player) might affect the offense or the locker room vibe or whatever - is not a bad thing. But it's not the only way to come to a decision. It's just one aspect of any move.

I think he feels the guys do have use and can contribute. Maybe not as they had in previous years - but at least in some meaningful way. I'm not agreeing with this. For the most part, I'd rather get rid of a guy a year early than a year late. I think football is a pretty brutal reality for most players. It's make millions - or nothing. And youth usually trumps age. It's gotta be hard on these guys when the end is in sight.

I would love Gallo as well. I think something like Mitchell/Turang would be a strong offer. Or you could go Mitchell OR Turang, plus Hiura and Ashby. That would be good as well. But I think other teams will be able to outbid us - simply with higher ranked talent. The Yankees could give up Dominguez, for instance. The Padres have Gore and Abrams and Campusano. This is going on the guess that Texas would take one very high valued prospect as opposed to 2-3 lesser guys (but still good - just not elite prospects).

Couldn't agree more. Would not be excited at all if we acquired Story. Story scares me as well.

Happy to see Rodgers actually answer questions. I was thinking he'd sidestep stuff. But he isn't, which is good. I appreciate it.

I think this was Dave Stewart's line that landed him the Diamondback's GM job back in the day.

Who’s taking Scherzer’s 15 million in deferred salary for 2021 and Hand’s 6.5? It won’t be Milwaukee; nor does that package of players entice the Nationals to eat 21.5 million dollars. Due to the deferments they probably don’t move either player My original proposal incorrectly assigned salaries of Scherzer. I thought his number was $15M - not $35M. So we would be taking on more like $12M - not $5M. And the entire salary is deferred. I think it's simple enough to divide up paying the salary based on time played between the two teams. For Hand, I was simply dividing up his $10.5 equally (2/3 to Nationals and 1/3 to Brewers). You could probably divide up payments between the teams - again based on time played. It doesn't seem that hard. https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/national-league/washington-nationals/

I don't have a problem with the Cobb trade - so long as the team thinks he can contribute in a meaningful way. I've felt they team has missed someone like him since he left. It's why I think the drafting of Amari Rodgers is intriguing. So if the team thinks Cobb can come back and do some good - I'm all for it. That said, 30+ year old WRs usually don't age well - so I'm not expecting a ton. I'm assuming the cost will not be much, and Cobb will restructure his deal. I just don't want a Jimmy Graham situation - aging veteran who just isn't that good anymore.

Agreed its a saga, and it filled the dead time in the NFL between the draft and the start of training camp. Unlike MLB or the NBA the owners in football are very strong vis a vis the players. Other than flat out retiring (and still potentially having to pay back bonus money) Rodgers didn't have many realistic options. I assume when the details are known the team gave him some concessions for Rodgers to save face and allow the team to move foreword. As someone else pointed out, the real legacy will likely be that Rodgers revealed himself as an ego-maniac and kind of a tool to a lot of Packer fans. Yeah, Rodgers did come across pretty much like a putz. Personally, I don't begrudge the guy for trying to flex his muscles, but I dislike his passive/aggressive approach (cryptic comments, leaked info, etc.). I just want to say, be a man and stop acting like an aggrieved teenager. Just go out and say you had some disagreements and frustrations with management, and you're working toward a way to move forward. He could still do this. Just say he had some issues with the front office, but they're working through it all - and hope for a great future. He doesn't have to go into details (in fact, just say that's between them). But I doubt he does. I would prefer to he tackles the stuff head on - as his future will - whether he likes it or not - be a subject in the media and in the minds of the fans. But we shall see how it plays out.

Of course we do. But that's impossible to guarantee - so it's sort of a silly question. The question is 'Is it worth giving up your top prospect to have a better better chance at winning a World Series?' One thing about baseball is that one person's addition isn't going to vault a team from 'playoff contender' to 'near-guaranteed' Series champion. If the Brewers had a 20% of winning the World Series, and added a healthy Mike Trout, it's not like we would suddenly have a 80-90% chance of winning. Yes, we have improved our chances, but not by that much. It doesn't mean you don't make moves. Just that it's all a fine balance.

While it will be interesting to find out specifics regarding Rodgers dissatisfaction with the team, I think everything pretty much worked out for Green Bay. - Packers get Rodgers for another year. Isn't that what they had always planned (at least according to Rodgers)? - Packers can trade Rodgers next off season and point to their deal with Rodgers - saying it was the only way they could get him back this year. Gives the front office cover if they make the move. - If the team truly is committed to working with Rodgers to foster a better relationship between the two parties - great. That's a good thing - and could keep Rodgers in GB longer (assuming both sides want him here). In the end, it gives GB another season of Rodgers - which most agree is the best thing as Love is probably not quite ready. And it gives both sides some time to either make up and extend their relationship - or move on.

Bucks have limited means to acquire players. Here's a rundown. - Existing guaranteed deals: Giannis, Middleton, Lopez, Holiday, DiVincenzo, Connaughton, Nwora. Sam Merrill's contract is only partially guaranteed ($500,000), but becomes guaranteed if he's on the roster on Aug. 8. - Draft: The Bucks have the 31st pick overall (1st pick in 2nd round). - Non-guaranteed deals: Mamadi Diakite and Elijah Bryant both have non-guaranteed deals. We can cut them anytime before the season begins and owe them nothing. - Trades: Since the Bucks are over the cap, any trades they make must trade back a - roughly - equal salary (I think it has to be within 80%). A trade exception can be used as well (see details below). Unless we are wiling to deal one of our bigger players - such as Lopez or Middleton - a major trade is unlikely. - Trade Exceptions: We have two trade exceptions worth $1.7M and another worth $4.9M. A trade exception can be broken up. So the $4.9M exception could be used trade for one player making $2.5M and another making $2.4M. Trade exceptions can't be combined or bundled together with another player's salary. And trade exceptions are only good for trades. We can't use them for free agent signings. All said, these could potentially be used to acquire a lower tier player making no more than $4.9M. - Free Agents: As we are over the cap, we are limited in free agency. We have the following options: Taxpayer Midlevel Exception: This allows the Bucks to sign a FA for up to $5.9M. Veteran minimum contracts: The Bucks can sign any player to the veteran minimum. - Re-signing own free agents: It is believed that Bryn Forbes and Bobby Portis will opt out of their contracts and become free agents. General talk is that both will get quite a bit more than they were paid last year. For each of these guys, we have Non Bird Rights on them - meaning we can't go over the $5.9M Midlevel Exception for either of their salary. This limits us - especially - for Portis. Jeff Teague is also an unrestricted FA. Regarding PJ Tucker, we have full Bird rights on him - meaning we can sign him without concern for the salary cap. I have read various valuations on him, and they are pretty wide - but mostly in the $6-10M range. Tucker's value will be limited by his age, plus his limitations on offense. But several teams are reportedly interested him. But if that turns into an offer is another story. Thanasis Antetokounmpo is also a restricted free agent, but many expect him to be back on a minimum deal. While he doesn't play a lot, he brings a ton of energy to the team, and I'm sure the Bucks would like to keep Giannis happy.

Great. Rodgers is back. We are a better team. I am happy. Let's win some football games.

How about a Nationals package deal: Brewers get: LHRP Brad Hand (still owed $3.5M), FA after season RHRP Daniel Hudson (still owed $2.0M), FA after season RSP Max Scherzer (still owed $5.0), FA after season Take on $10.5M in salary this year Nationals get: Ashby or Small Zamora/Garcia type Corey Ray The Nats will likely want a pitcher in return - and probably one that's closer to the majors than not. That means Ashby or Small would need to be the centerpiece. We'd then have to give them a decent secondary prospect - I just threw out Zamora and Garcia as options. You could top it off with a guy like Ray - someone with a decent tool set, but has not put it together. He's essentially a throw in lottery ticket. Other people will know the minor league player values better than me. My guys are just a starting point. Assuming we could take on $10M, it gives us a great starter, plus two veteran relievers who are solid. Maybe not great - but solid. It also allows Lauer and Houser to be in the pen (assuming Anderson stays in the 5th slot). Obviously Scherzer would have to approve the deal. But if he did, we'd have a killer rotation and the bullpen would suddenly be a lot deeper.

I was a fan of Inciarte. Amazing how he just crashed as a player.

With the draft just a few days away, I thought it was appropriate to start next season's thread. Feel free to discuss stuff surrounding the World Freakin' Champion Milwaukee Bucks.

I believe the cap hit for us if we traded him would be around $21M.