rickh150

Your logic is off. If I don't say it's a top priority, then it is considered unimportant? I know MA wants to win a WS. That is not being debated by me. Of course, he does. His top priority was the issue, and that could take us down a couple of different roads.

Door A ...... 8 Brewer playoff appearances in the next 10 years; each playoff outcome is uncertain. Door B...... 1 Brewer playoff appearance in the next 10 years that ends with a WS championship. Which one do you take? Which one would MA take? I think most would take the 8 playoffs that could possibly end with multiple titles. Baseball would be highly interesting and revelant in Milwaukee. Yet, the ultimate, top, prime goal would not have been accomplished yet. Some of those playoff births could be one and does in the wild card; some years could pit us against juggernauts with 100 plus wins. Door B gets the job done definitely, but most of those years would not be good baseball years. What would the baseball scene look like in Milwaukee? Now, this is just a little what if game to think about... something friends or couples might ponder on a long car ride. However, it makes you put value on what you view as ultimate. In Milwaukee and other small market teams, the goal of just being a good quality organization year in, year out (door A) is a pipe dream. What organization wouldn't jump at door A? Financially, good news... fans in the stands, good tv ratings, merchandise is selling. Community wide, people are following baseball. Baseball is fun to watch. Door B is an organization constantly rebuilding, retooling, trading (sound familiar), picking up 29 year olds off waivers. The road is long. Most of the baseball seasons are over before they start. Yet, lightening strikes. A WS is won. Do you see the dilemma? If a WS is THE goal, MA takes door B. Goal accomplished. Yet, as a business man and fan, boy, door A would be a great ride. Really, what does MA and fans want more?

Of course he said his goal is to win a World Series. What else is he supposed to say? That was not included a year and a half ago, thus the reason for this thread. Then, the TOP goal was having a highly competitive team, year in and year out. Even the CURRENT Brewers mission statement does not mention anything about bringing a championship to Milwaukee ( the highly competitive team talk is a there, though). Many have view this omission as no big deal, but it really goes to the heart of why we are playing games and having seasons of baseball in Milwaukee. Will we continue to "go for it" when the time presents itself ( get a CC/Greinke) knowing that small markets cannot or simply haven't yet fielded consistently playoff caliber teams over a 10 year period? Or will we follow the model of the 2000s Twins /Rays which clung to young players, prolonging periods of good years but did not trade top prospects for polished players to possibly go further in the playoffs getting a WS title.

Mark A. changed his ultimate goal.....no talk of primary goal being a consistent winner, which is of course unattainable for small markets. Just we are in this for the whole ball of wax! Let's build it up, try to get it done. Agressive. Love it. http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/mil/fan_forum/letter/

Nelson is in the rotation most probably; if not, he's at AAA/AA rotation. No way that they are going to mess with him in that tweener role. He's actually my odds on favorite for opening day starter if he does better than ok in spring training. Hader is a starter at AAA/AA to start the season. Scooter is gone, probably, agreed... Garza is in the rotation, or he will be cut or traded for not much with Brewers picking up all of his salary. Do you remember September of 2015? Brewers aren't touching that again. This thread is based on the roster of today. Certainly that will change. Nelson is the most likely of the starting candidates to be traded. Garza will be shunted to the pen to make room for guys who they control beyond this year, whether he likes it or not. If he walks away, that's a bonus. Hader needs to face major league hitters to continue his growth. Another year in Colorado or back at AAA will hurt his development more than temporarily transitioning to reliever in the big leagues. When a spot opens he'll start, but for now he's a nice arm for the pen that's short on them. Strongly, but respectfully, disagree. You make good points, though. Nelson is least likely to be traded. He has underachieved and his trade value isn't great, just good, because of it. Garza won't be going to the pen. Start, trade, or cut are the options (in that order). Hader loses value as a reliever. They won't touch that this year or next, hopefully ever. No reason to now.... start his clock for middle relief work? We need to groom him for greatness (if this is 2011, though, I'd agree- I could see putting the best pen together, best talent in organization). Hopefully, he becomes a playoff starter at some point.

Nelson is in the rotation most probably; if not, he's at AAA/AA rotation. No way that they are going to mess with him in that tweener role. He's actually my odds on favorite for opening day starter if he does better than ok in spring training. Hader is a starter at AAA/AA to start the season. Scooter is gone, probably, agreed... Garza is in the rotation, or he will be cut or traded for not much with Brewers picking up all of his salary. Do you remember September of 2015? Brewers aren't touching that again.

Love beating the Bulls twice and the Bears twice this season..... mostly because it is causing Cubs fans some pain. Then again, they largely aren't invested when their teams are losing. Zing.

I guessed 70 wins last year. I guess 70 wins this year. Without Braun with presumably minor leaguers in his place, I'll go 65. Our bullpen is bare. I hope that I'm wrong, but our new 1B and 3B feel more like Tyler Houston and a Marquis Grissom addition. Without even seeing a glimpse of 2018's team, I could see a huge jump happening then, maybe even back to a .500 team. We have boatloads of young talent for the rotation coming up presumably (Hader, Woodruff, Ortiz, Bickford). An arm or two is bound to stick with a couple mainstays from our current team. Jimmy Nelson and Willy Peralta are still solid; Nelson is my pick for most improved player in 2017. A better pitching rotation and lower team ERA will make the biggest difference in our win total, and that to me looks to happen in 2018.

I'll be your witness. But I don't think thinking this team can win 75 games is being too much of a homer. In this division....... kind of.

Also, with the Brewers having the lowest payroll in the game in 2016, does that give us more revsharing dollars, or is it solely based on market size? Perhaps a sliding scale/formula is used?

Any word on the Brewers' revenue sharing amount this year? Any word on more details of revenue sharing in the new CBA? I recently read that 2016 was the first year that the top 15 markets received no revenue sharing dollars. In the past few seasons, 31% of each team's local revenue was put in a pot and shared evenly among all clubs, along with centralized MLB funds given disproportionately to small markets. Now, if the top fifteen teams aren't receiving ANY shared funds, wouldn't that significantly increase our revshare amount? Any help figuring this out would be appreciated...

Nothing to do with Nottingham, agreed. Yet, they collectively are worried about his progress.

You may be right, and I hear ya. I'd vote for a true draft in the first round where all non-playoff teams pick out of a hat for the first 20 draft positions. That would end all talk of tanking/perception of tanking. Yet, we are drafting fairly low now. Great players are drafted all throughout the first few rounds. Plus, we got Villar in a trade, and I'm hoping he has star written on him by season's end. Plus, if you say we have #2 type pitchers, that means in my mind that they could become #1's with some work.

No possible way that is "purely a money dump".... absurd. First off, Maldy is hardly making any money.... 3 million or so? Second, we know what we had in Maldy, and it was basically a #2 defensive catcher who hit low .200s most of his time here. Very low bar to beat. They are just giving some young unknowns more at bats and opportunities to succeed.

Small windows for small markets..... look at KC. How sad is that? They built it the "right" way, and now after an extremely brief run they have to blow up the ship and trade off pieces. Sad for their fans. Sad that these teams, including us, that can't keep good home-grown teams together for longer periods of time. It's just sad that the disparity between bigs and smalls is so large. I'd like to see a MLB FA pool of shared money that is for teams to help specifically sign their own FA. Seems like that would be good for the game.... promote teams to keep their own..... build relationships in the neighborhood.... keep t-shirt names relevant. Also, sharing all tv $ has to be in the next CBA.

I mean...the Brewers traded for Zach Greinke and CC Sabathia not so long ago. Couldn't keep either...... plus, we are living in a different baseball world than 2008-2011. Big market tv deals blew up big market team payrolls. All playoff teams, shy of Cleveland, had a 150 million plus payroll in 2016.

Why do you say that? The changes on the International signing where essentially small markets can spend 10mil. Vs. a Big Market 8.3mil. Luxury tax penalties? Confusing but seems pretty painful to exceed multiple seasons. Would put big markets most likely to keep payrolls towards the max and not go over. You get a 1st pick+500k international spend bonus, or a 2nd pick+1mil international bonus. How that's decided I wouldn't know but no more lotteries where St Louis gets a 1st round comp and the Brewers get nothing in unfortunate years. The QO penalties award small markets over big markets. Truthfully, this seems to me to restrict big markets quite massively. And the Players, I'm not sure why they'd want to hurt their earning potential so much. How likely is it Bryce Harper will get 10/500 in free agency if the big market team leaves 150mil roughly left to spend on the team? I guess if teams like New York are going from making 500million profit to 725million profit with these restrictions they aren't going to concern 100million in tax penalties if they decide to grow to 300million payroll. Returning them back to a 500million profit. The international part is really hurting. Hard Capped at 4.75mil for 20teams and the other 10, unsure again how determined if receive 1/500 or 2/1mil. If you split it adds 7.5mil. Means 102.5million hard capped. The Padres as that article states paid 80million this period alone in 40+40tax on the last signing period....you know supposedly the tax that induces MLB international funding to promote and develop in that area more... Now how does that money come to this supposed prior penalty receiver? KC not liking new CBA..... switching strategy- trading off starters- rebuild underway.

Most of what you mentioned is something that MLB wants, including the draft. Can't just go ahead and do it, gotta get the union on board too, and they weren't. So.... not a small market friendly deal then.

Aren't Cards getting revenue sharing money, using it (with state funds) for Ballpark Village $200+ addition?

Less revenue sharing $, probably.... Revenue sharing helping Yanks get richer, A's getting poorer... No 1st rounder attached to FA, blowing salaries up, along with arby deals... Still no international draft... Big, new TV deals ignored making lakes into gulfs between bigs and smalls... Oh, thanks for the scraps, though, MLB.

Not much in this deal is real small market friendly.....

You lost me. This is nothing more than trying to catch lightning in a bottle. Jose Abreu has talent...and a lot of it. That is why he was paid $50mil+ mil. I am guessing Stearns saw the barren wasteland in the minors and likes Thames as a guy who can be average at 1B. Even average 1B get really pricey so if Thames can be that guy we save a nice chunk of money. I don't think Stearns envisions Thames as a high ceiling guy, but more of a role player or to atleast fill a black hole with something. Stearns views him more than a role player. He's penciled in as the first baseman for the next three plus years. I agree with you in that this situation cannot be compared to Abreu's signing. The money isn't even close.

Like the deal.... Brewers have to think out of the box, and this is one way to do it. We can't outspend people, can't recruit major free agents or top international free agents (now), and can't hoard great minor leaguers (40 man roster). The deck is stacked against us so why not spend minimal $ when payroll is down to get a diamond (or glass stone) for a manageable period of time. It possibly fills a Fielder-sized gap at 1B and doesn't affect in one bit the other plans the front office has. Plus, Brewers still have an opportunity to get something, anything for Carter. I'll be surprised if we can't get something for him in the next few days. I could see Carter packaged with Thornburg for a top 100 prospect. I know that his stats are not MLB stats, but.........his average, OBP are really impressive with the power. If other of our top prospect/ AA or AAA players had a fraction of his stats, we'd be singing their praises. Also, how do you pronounce his name?

[sarcasm]Gee, you mean a slightly above average middle reliever would not make $7.5M/yr. Yeah..that would be a shame.[/sarcasm] I'm okay with these guys making as much money as possible. The owners definitely do no need to be lining their pockets with even more money than they already are. So your worldview is......players, money, good alongside owners, money, bad? On a related point....How about a smaller gap between the rich and poor teams in baseball? That is the issue that should be on the minds of small market teams. Since it takes two teams to make a game, sharing more revenue (especially tv money) seems logical and good for the game overall.

Goforth, Kirk, The Twins pickup K disaster....... All these off 40 man before Wang and Coulter.