adambr2

Yeah, they voided it because he had a cut on his foot. Doesn't seem like they were really all that eager to ensure he became a part of their organization. If anything, it sounds like they realized they'd overpaid and it was an excuse for them to back out. Probably the reason they weren't back in on him when his foot was healed up? Or why he's signed for 1 year deals the past two seasons. But would you maybe like to provide some context for the Chiefs Super Bowls wins? They have this guy at QB who is REALLY good. And they've got lots of players on offense who are REALLY good. They haven't won because of their defense. Yet you're trying to say because a guy plays on that defense, that somehow proves your point that he's a talented player? He hasn't been better than King and this conversation has veered off into the totally ridiculous now. In 2020, yes Breeland was better. Absolutely. We also have a QB and offense that is really good, so I'm not really sure what your point is there in comparing to King. Definitely the Chiefs have won on the strength of their offense. But their corner play has been just fine, even a positive. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2020-secondary-rankings

The Packers front office makes mistakes, but they aren't idiots. If Breeland was better than King, he would have been on the field against Tampa a couple weeks ago, not Buffalo. The Packers grabbed him in in 2018 because they were desperately thin at CB, and he ended up playing ok. They didn't resign him because they deemed him not better than what they already had coming back in 2019, despite the fact that they could have gotten him on a cheap deal. He signed a 1-year, $5 million deal in 2019, and after finding a cold market, resigned an even cheaper 1-year, $4.5 million deal for 2020. That is pocket change for a veteran DB. It would be one thing if it was only the Packers that were missing the boat on the guy, but literally the whole league could have had the guy 3 years in a row now, and for the most part, they've passed. That tells me all I need to know. He's ok. That's it. I think anyone would have been better than Kevin King on the field against Tampa a couple weeks ago. So yes, that does seem to have been a big mistake. He was PFFs #14 corner this year in yards per snap against outside coverage. Yes, at his worst, he's not been good. But at his best he's certainly been far better than replacement level, which is what you said. I am not saying he should have been brought back to Green Bay, we thought we had a pretty decent CB room. But the Packers FO is not immune to bad moves, and the coaching staff is not immune to bad moves. Maybe Josh Jackson should have had more opportunities. We'll never know.

Just not true. At his worst? Sure. His best has been far better than that. Guy has some definite off the field issues that have cost him some money. But he's been a good starting corner at his best.

H/T, do you want to provide context behind Breeland's cheap deals, or just use sarcasm and condescension to prove your point? Breeland originally got 8M a year from Carolina on a multi year deal. It was voided because of a failed physical. He had to settle for a cheap multi year deal because of this and off the field issues haven't helped. But he's a good, talented corner. He's been a consistently high rated corner by PFF. And yes, he's much better than King. That's not saying much, and if you feel head and shoulders is hyperbole, go ahead and use whatever term you'd like, but he's better.

"Passionate" and "energetic" and "aggressive" sounds like total coach-speak to me. All coaches at this level are passionate. Do you ever hear people around the league describe a coach by saying, "he's kind of apathetic and lifeless."? I remember Ron Zook being described as "piss and vinegar", whatever that means. None of it means much. What do they mean by aggressive? His units are in the bottom half of the league typically in blitzing, so it's not that. Maybe it could be aggressive in the sense of attempting to force fumbles, but we've been emphasizing that ever since the Ed Donatell days.

I can compare it too LaFleur because people made the same complaint when he came in. And yes, Washington had VERY little talent on defense. You're using Bashaud Breeland to help make your argument.....which I kinda think makes mine. Good enough to start for a team that won the Super Bowl last year but not good enough to use as an example of the talent that Barry had to work with? Breeland is solid. He's head and shoulders better than Kevin King as a #2 corner. If you'll downplay him as a good player that Barry had to work with than nothing I say will convince you otherwise.

That kind of attitude you'd just go spend on Turner. When Cainçs money comes off the books, the team is going to pinched on some Arbitration contracts. Mitchell being added for CF saves money to address that vs needing to pony up with a FA contract. I'd rather keep what little positive minors we have and pay 3/33.4mil to Turner than give them up and pay Ramirez that amount. Unless your staring down the barrel of a 2year window and plan to tear it down for a rebuild. 2years I'm staring at no CF, RF, C, at least one of SS/3b. 3rd or 4th yrs of Arbitration to Hader and Woodruff. No Lindblom. The previous proposal sent Urias and Houser. Turang as well. Youre staring at a lot of holes with no promising 2+WAR prospects coming to fill out needs at minimum. If you do they're likely -.5 to .5WAR. Or dumpster diving even more contracts. Keep in mind the WS champs added 2020 Cy Young Winner Bauer to an already Stellar pitching rotation. Doesn't seem smart to put your team in a 2year window when the team spending the most amount of money loaded with talent young and old is in top form. That's sorta a hill to die on with being fired when you turn in to Melvin spending to be 80win team at best. And yr 4 you tear it down and rebuild. First, Ramirez is under control for 3 years, not 2. Mitchell has not played a day of professional baseball. We don't even know if he will ever make the big leagues much less be certain that he's our future replacement for Cain. I think you're undervaluing just how good Ramirez is. He's a near Yelich level acquisition and not all that expensive. Mitchell is a good, not elite prospect. I'm fine with getting Turner instead because I don't think Ramirez is really available. I don't think 3/33 is getting it done or he'd probably already be a Brewer.

My personal belief is that Andy Reid has dedicated a great deal more of his life and time to coaching than he has to fatherhood and his kids have paid the price.

I'm just disappointed in the same way that I'm disappointed on draft day when the guy I wanted fell to us and we took some guy I never heard of instead. I realize I could end up being wrong.

I love Mitchell but if you have a chance to get Jose Ramirez and it requires Garrett Mitchell that is not going to be a deal breaker. You'd make that deal and worry about who eventually replaces Cain later.

Obviously being over his head as a DC and more suited to be a position coach is MY opinion. We'll see. It seems like it to me. I know I can't say it for sure. But it's a really uninspiring hire. And I don't know how you can compare it to Lafleur. Lafleur was unproven in this gig. Barry has had shots. Yeah, the Lions stunk. But you'd like to have a little better accolades for your new DC than to say, "Well, his players stunk. What do you expect?" Washington's defense was not THAT bad. He had Kerrigan. He had Preston Smith. He had Josh Norman. He had Breeland. To say there was very little talent on that D just isn't really accurate. He still had the worst 3rd down defense in football and couldn't stop the run a lick. I hope it works out. But I hate the hire.

Since we are fans of the Brewers, I would estimate that the chances of Corbin Burnes blowing out his elbow sliding into any particular bag are at least 60-70% if the DH is gone this season. So I'll jump on any rule that eliminates that possibility.

Andy Reid's kid and Chiefs OLBs coach might end up with a vehicular manslaughter charge of a 5 year old kid. That's a great look before the Super Bowl.

I think what is a little troubling about this hire is that Leonhard and Barry were literally offered the job on the same day. They're nothing alike. You went from offering the job to a 38 year old young up and comer from the college ranks without any NFL coaching experience, to a journeyman 50 something retread. That doesn't suggest that MLF has any real vision for this defense. It looks like he didn't expect Leonhard to turn it down, panicked and just hired the next guy on his list. It's a bit baffling. If Barry was his first choice I could at least wrap my head around the idea that maybe he just wanted someone experienced for a quicker transition, but he was going to go a totally different route. Everything about Barry's career just screams great position coach, and totally in over his head as defensive coordinator. I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, I'm really disappointed. I'll try to have some blind faith about it but LaFleur’s only other handpicked coordinator has been Shawn Mennenga so it's certainly not easy.

Baseballtradevalues.com has the value of Ramirez at almost exactly the same as Urias+Houser+Turang+Mitchell. I would do that in a heartbeat. I am sure the Indians would not. It was the only trade I could come up with that offered enough value with 4 players or less without giving up Hiura, Burnes or Woodruff. I don't really like to go more than 4 because then it just kind of gets kind of ridiculous. I don't think Cleveland is too motivated to move Ramirez, I think it's more of a "blow us away" situation. It's not like he's going to lose much value in a year and they can always revisit trading him then.

While I admit I don't really know much about Barry, I do know that two prior organizations took a chance on him as DC and he was not successful for either. I have no doubt that talent was part of it, but that's not a great place to start. In the absence of getting the guy we really wanted I'd rather take a shot on an up and comer with some fresh ideas rather than a recycled product. Barry might be the right guy with some talent, but he also might be one of many guys who is just a lot better suited as a position coach than a coordinator.

Agreed. If Barry does end up being the choice, that's terrible. The guy has already had two shots to lead an NFL defense, and was an abject failure both times. I would have rather just hung on to Pettine if Barry is the alternative. Yep. This is a desirable position with talented players. Please tell me we can do better than this guy. It doesn’t have to be Leonhard or bust. Evero would be a fine choice. Joe Barry as DC for Detroit: The 422 pass completions that Detroit surrendered in 2007 is an NFL record. The 70.1% completion percentage against the Lions defense was the worst in league history until it was broken by the Colts in 2011.

Was Burnes a top 50? I know I'm splitting hairs here. I was just thinking him and Woodruff were both lower end top 100 guys. I don't think Lucroy ever cracked the top 100 and he ended up being arguably our best catcher in franchise history.

Sounds like Joe Barry is going to get the job over Evero. Gross. That's about as uninspiring of a DC hire as we could find.

Michael Brantley has worked out very well. Lorenzo Cain. Jake Odorizzi. Even Alcides Escobar had some solid seasons. Jeffress has turned into a solid player. Obviously Nelson Cruz was a huge miss. Grisham looked like a stud last year. I was talking top 50 prospects though. I don't think a single of these guys ever was one, at least not in the last decade. Escobar may have been, he was pretty highly touted but he was largely a bust. He played for a long time, that's about the best thing you can say about him. He basically followed the Orlando Arcia trajectory if Arcia never gets better. Most of the real home runs (Woodruff, Burnes) were less touted guys. I didn't include them because I was only talking about the real top prospects of ours this last decade and how they've panned out. But for the same reason I also didn't include Luis Ortiz, Phil Bickford and Jorge Lopez-- 51 to 100 type prospects.

Yeah, I don't think there's really anything to Braves prospects being flops. I think you could look through any system and find guys that have been home runs and find some that haven't panned out. Frankly I think our own top 50s have been way more miss than hit. Phillips, Ray, Arcia, Brinson. Hader has been the one real home run in recent memory if we're looking at top 50 guys. Hiura looked to be well on his way but now we're kind of back in wait and see mode.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/02/braves-to-re-sign-marcell-ozuna.html

I know we as Brewer fans don't have much good to say about Cardinals players but even when he was a Cardinal I can't recall a bad word being said about Wong. From everything I've heard he's a really good dude.

I don't think the assumption is that Hiura will be fine at 1B. I think the assumption is that whatever defense he gives us will be less harmful to us than the defense he gave us at 2B. Anything beyond that is welcome.