PeaveyFury

$136 million last year, just for the record. Yep and it was smaller than every team in the NL Central but for Pittsburgh and the 6th smallest overall in the NL Not too bad for the smallest market in baseball. And still pretty significantly "beyond" $100 million...

Apparently they are getting their info from Brewer apologist and mouthpiece Tom Haudricourt who's crying poor in an article today. If true, that's odd considering he said the exact opposite in a radio interview just last night.

$136 million last year, just for the record.

Mike Axisa (who wrote this and another Brewers article yesterday) and Nightengale seem to be the two guys that have run with this 'tight budget' nonsense....

Wisconsin up four spots to 8th, which is most important because it has them 2 ahead of Penn State with a little wiggle room.

Something like this is probably the more logical deal with the Mets....

I think if he's moved, it's because of the org's projections of his OPS in years 4 and 5. I'd imagine most would agree with you about 2020/year 3.

Davis/McNeil would be a very interesting and tempting offer.

They do have a few months left until Spring Training.... Why are you assuming that any of these guys they let go were actually ones they wanted?

We've let the discussion go on quite a ways here, let's remember to be civil, please.

Well, that certainly makes it sound like the Brewers and Shaw are done....

Not really, Hader is not going to fill a bunch of roster spots. If you lose a wheel taking one of the other three wheels to replace the wheel that fell off still leaves you with three wheels. The only way to truly improve is through FA and trade that ADD talent on the MLB roster not subtract. I think his point is that you use one fancy wheel to pay for two wheels that may appreciate in value, leaving you with 4 wheels and a viable path forward.

Wow, you are piling up the hot takes tonight. BS it's not...most of you are all about getting cheap undervalued players that MIGHT produce. Take a look at the non tender thread...a lot are saying they are okay with bringing Arcia back at 1 year for 2.2 million. The guy is trash, he can't hit a lick. But, since he was "cheap" a lot of people are okay with it. Prime example...once you see what Moose and Grandal signed for, all of a sudden no one wanted them back because they thought the contracts were too rich. But prior to that those same people wanted them back. Okay...so, who can you get for less that will produce as much or more then either of them?? You can get guys, but unless it's a complete flukey year, I can almost guarantee you won't get the same or better production for significantly less. But that's okay with a lot of you, because at least they didn't over pay. The one year deals have got to stop...at some point you have to have a "core" and a core of all young players with potential isn't going to cut it. It's fine to have some, but you also have to have a corp of veterans that will all be together for awhile too. I'm not sure you have a realistic concept in mind for how to actually build a Brewers roster, and certainly not one that can compete on a regular basis. Not all 26 spots can be filled with guys who mash. And there isn't some unlimited bankroll that can pay for all of this. I think your expectations need to be adjusted considerably. Bad contracts pile up and prevent you from actually having good players on your roster. That's why people don't want Moose at age 34 making 18 million or whatever. You can't just write blank checks without consequences.

Remember when there was lamenting over that trade around Memorial Day?

My (very) rough math has them around $75 million in payroll right now. Lots of money to spend if they choose to. Considering our limited prospect capital, I do wonder if they'll use some of the room to acquire a bad contract or two with a player they like to dramatically lower the cost. Seems like a way to do more with little.

Wow. Just remember, David Stearns doesn't panic like fans on message boards do.

I think the main goal/hope is to take what was a game in the 3rd quarter before getting out of hand the first time and making that a game in the 4th quarter. Play it close as long as you can, and even though you probably won't win, it gets you to Pasadena.

I think his splits do make him a great candidate if they want to platoon with Thames or a Thames-type when the dust settles.

That sounds like something else might get done, to me at least.

Considering they paid Saladino/Spangenberg $2 million last year, probably not.

I think it's all a me-first crap act, personally.

Hasn’t there also historically been some weight given to how a team is playing at year- end? If so, Wisconsin won four straight to end the year, including two wins over top 8-18 opponents. Penn State lost two of their last four, beat Indiana by one score at home, and was only up 7-3 at halftime at home vs. a horrendous Rutgers team. I think that plays in UW’s favor as well.

Though true, there's waffle language in the Rose Bowl's process. Directly from the Rose Bowl site itself: Should a team from the Big Ten or Pac-12 be selected to go to the College Football Playoff, the Tournament of Roses will traditionally select the next-highest CFP-ranked team from that conference. There is, however, a caveat to that clause in the contract. “If the next-highest ranked team is in a ‘cluster’ of teams, meaning there is another team or teams from the same conference ranked within several spots of each other, the Tournament of Roses will select the team from that cluster that will result in the best possible matchup for the Rose Bowl Game,” said Rose Bowl Management Committee Chair Scott Jenkins. In a cluster situation, the Tournament of Roses will take into account factors, in no particular order, such as: the last time a team played in the Rose Bowl Game, head-to-head results, regular season schedule, overall record, opponents played, past playoff or bowl appearances and performance, and historical matchups. I would think that regardless of what happens on Saturday, Wisconsin and PSU would be in a 'cluster' together.

Wisconsin did jump Penn State in both polls today, which is very good news for the Rose Bowl chances...

There is no way to definitively say that at this point in the season. Why? What have you seen in 12 games that makes you think they can even compete with SF or NO in the divisional round? A wild card win against Seattle or Minnesota isn't even a gimme. Why are you assuming the Packers can’t win the second bye? San Francisco’s schedule is brutal the rest of the way, and SF and NO still play each other.