Point Beer Is Best

Webb was assigned to AAA.

Invest in better players = better product on the field = higher attendance/merchandise sales = increased revenue = projects that will yield dividends in the future. - Recent graduate from a Top-10 public university MBA program Ok... but what does that change from my argument? How does accelerating the expense of Braun's contract equate to investing in better players? As a side note, I have to spend a lot of my time at work explaining financial details in laymen's terms to non-finance MBA's.

Judging from the crickets, guessing this is not a viable option? That's not proper accounting, and you'd surely get in big trouble if the IRS found out as you'd basically be severely understating your income by kicking his whole contract to expense without good reason. And there's no logical reason to do that anyways. What's more realistic is to earmark a chunk of profit during these low payroll years through strategic planning and spend more as needed when we compete. I would be very surprised if they haven't done that the last few years. Right, you'd basically be confusing normal business accounting rules with a NFL style salary cap accounting, which doesn't really apply here. Even then, you can't accelerate recognition of that expense under salary cap accounting without paying out the cash. You can manipulate salary cap accounting to recognize the expense LATER, but under both situations (recognizing the expense now vs recognizing it later) require you to pay out the cash now.

As others have said, there's really no benefit (and a lot of detriment) to doing this from a cash management standpoint. When payroll is low, use the money to invest in projects that will yield dividends in the future (which is arguably what they attempted this winter with the new concessions capital project). The idea there is that when it comes time to pay Braun, you ought to have more revenue-generating projects in place which give you more cash incoming than you would have had if you paid Braun off early. Giving Braun more money now is really bad idea from a working capital standpoint. - a CPA in private industry

Just to throw some cold water on this, a friendly reminder that we are only halfway through the season and are just 2 games up on the Cubs and would almost certainly be 5+ games back of the 2nd Wild Card if the Cubs overtake us. The safety net of the WC isn't a viable option for us - we would have to be confident in winning the whole division. We're certainly ahead of schedule, but I'd feel much better about parting with future pieces if we were 10 games over .500 at this point. I think we should stay the course.

I guess I've just gotten used to the Brewers being overlooked on the national stage - it's not unlike what we went through 10 years ago when our first wave of prospects came up and we became competitive again (the exciting thing for us is that we really haven't tapped into our prospect pipeline yet, outside of Arcia). It comes with the territory. The economics of baseball put us at an enormous disadvantage. It should just make you appreciate being in 1st place this far into the season when nobody thought we would be, and it will make it our ascent to the top (hopefully) that much sweeter. We will be in first place on Independence Day with a team that largely consists of reclamation projects that we wanted when nobody else did. That's worth more to me than what some talking head on TV has to say.

I don't recall any situation where a pre-arby (or any pre-free agency) player was given a frontloaded contract. I think the contract structure for these players mirror pretty closely what the players would get if they go year-to-year through the arby process with the hope that the player will accept a below-market outcome on the free agency years bought out in exchange for the financial security (if things go south without the contract, the player could just be non-tendered). However, in order to entice a pre-arby player to sign, you could always use a modest signing bonus ($5M or so) that the player would receive right away. They get $5M in their pocket immediately, which they otherwise would have to have waited until their 1st arby season to equal that in career earnings. The signing bonus is what enticed Braun to sign, because he had off-field business interests he wanted to finance (clothing line, restaurants, etc).

Haha actually I didn't assume anything so calm down. First off nothing in that interview said they thought highly of him. It mentions a few things they liked about him. I remember earlier on it was mentioned the Brewers actually didn't even bring up Travis Shaw in trade talks it was the Boston Red Sox. It was also mentioned Travis Shaw wasn't the main piece in the deal it was Mauricio Dubon. I am sure the Brewers liked him, but I don't think the Brewers could have ever imagined a guy on his way to a 3 WAR season. Sounded more like maybe he could be a starter if given the chance, but probably a versatile bench bat. I don't have the time to find the article, but I distinctly remember Stearns saying in an interview that as he was leaving the Winter meetings he had approached Dombrowski and said something to the effect, "Actually, I wanted to talk to you about Travis Shaw." He was certainly a player that Stearns coveted.

Brooks Kieschnick having success as a relief pitcher, as well as a power hitting lefty bench bat, was a bright spot on some pretty bad teams. Todd Coffey sprinting out of the bullpen with the Ultimate Warrior's entry music was pretty electric. But I would say both of those are more of the "fan favorite" category than having cult status. What separated Russell "The Muscle" Branyan (first of his name, leader of the Church of the Three True Outcomes, of which we are all disciples), was that he was revered for his Rob Deer-like 3TO percentage, so even when he struck out it only served to perpetuate his cult status. Branyan was incredibly patient, which resulted in the high Walk & K rates. Thames one-ups him here in his ability to lay off the junk.

[sarcasm]Are there splits available to show Reds pitching stats against Thames and players not named Thames?[/sarcasm]

Now that Thames has taken the Cardinals deep to add to his total, is anyone else just waiting for a similar comment from a STL player/coach/journalist?

That's just not true about Thompson. He is always changing the bottom of the roster, especially the practice squad. I think stearns is pretty much exactly like Ted Thompson so far. He has used free agency judiciously by shopping the bargain basement isle and uses the bottom of the roster to cycle possible players through on a regular basis. He has not gone after players you have to pay a lot to because they are a recognized name like Lohse or Garza preferring instead to look for guys who are cheap with some potential like Guera or Thames. Most importantly I think they both have an eye for talent and are not afraid to trust their eye and make deals that others might not have seen. Thames to me is a perfect example of that. Setting aside the age factor- which to me is more about the differences in the systems in place in each sport than anything- he is the equivalent of all the NFL rookie free agents Ted is willing to give a roster spot to. Thompson barely churns his roster, Stearns does considerably more. I like what Stearns does, as I liked what Ron Wolf did when he was the Packers GM. Stearns has the benefit, as did Wolf when he started with GB, of not having pressure for results like Thompson does. Once that pressure ratchets up Stearns won't do nearly as much churning as he does now, but, until then, he's doing exactly what he should be doing with the back end of the 40. I have to disagree pretty strongly on the "Thompson barely churns his roster" since it's factually incorrect. They are consistently one of the youngest teams in the league (3rd youngest the past two seasons), which you don't achieve unless you have high numbers of first year players replacing older guys considering they have an aging core group of players.

That has since been recanted. The lawyers for Mixon's collegiate victim dug up a Facebook post from a father at Mixon's high school who had thought Mixon assaulted his daughter (post was made years ago at the time of the incident). That father released a statement saying he did not have all the facts and was just frustrated at the time, and that Mixon and his daughter grew up together and remain good friends to this day saying that "Joe Mixon is welcome in my home anytime." Interesting to note that the Packers had Mixon in for an pre-draft visit, but most likely just doing their due diligence since Mixon was not invited to the combine. This would seem to indicate that Mixon has not been completely removed form their draft board, unlike last year when they removed Tyreek Hill from any consideration. I've read some articles where the author used historical draft picks from Thompson to try to determine which attributes he values by position. His RB picks have all fit a certain profile, except for Lacy and Wynn (bigger backs) who they selected based on value rather than attributes they desired. Of the RB's in this class, only Joe Mixon fits the criteria completely (McCaffrey missed the weight target by only 2 pounds). Based on that information, and how they value the position, they probably won't take McCaffrey even in the unlikely event he falls that far. But if Mixon is there when they pick at the end of the 3rd (or possibly even 2nd), they could decide to pull the trigger because the value is too much to pass up at that point. I've said it before, but I think Thompson is more concerned about how a player will be received in the locker room as opposed to any PR hit they may take by taking Mixon.

Here's the Bosio transcript in case anyone is wondering what he said: What I put in bold font is what I take issue with. Somebody posted a picture of him in this thread from his previous MLB stint. He has always been jacked. This nonsense of "his body has changed" is pretty unfounded. What I italicized is a pet-peeve of mine. It's the "I'm not saying XYZ, but other people are saying it" strategy used by people who propagate conspiracy theories and cast suspicions on others with zero factual evidence to back up what you (I mean, "other people") are saying, while attempting to distance yourself from responsibility for the innuendo.

Agree completely! I have to admit - I chuckled when I saw this comment agreeing with punishing steroid cheaters coming from a poster with a Bud Selig avatar. He's as culpable for the "steroid era" as anyone.

I know I'm putting the cart WAY ahead of the horse here, but let's say we exercise the team option for 2020 and we reach the subsequent offseason where we technically reach the final year of arbitration eligibility but we are contractually forbidden to offer it. Can we decline arbitration but still offer him a QO in order to attempt to receive draft pick compensation in return? I don't know if a situation like that has ever happened before since it would be so unique and would likely only apply to international free agents.

The WCW/WWE wars were coming to a conclusion when I was in college (I still remember the Monday Night "simulcast" between the two shows where Shane McMahon stormed into the WCW ring and announced HE was the McMahon that had actually bought the WCW). My boys are at about the age when I was when I first started watching (5 & 6) and decided to tune into Smackdown after not really watching for a number of years. I don't think there was actually a wrestling match for the first 45-50 minutes of the show. Just ring confrontations, really stupid sketches based on a really stupid reality TV show, etc. Needless to say, my boys had zero interest in watching it because there was no actual action. Where is the actual wrestling?

I think WR is more of a need than people realize. Adams - Free agent after '17, needs to be extended but that's not a guarantee right now Nelson - Free agent after '18, will be 34 after that so he's basically got two years left. While he may re-sign, chances are his effectiveness as a #1 outside WR are over, but maybe he carves out a niche in the slot to replace Cobb for a couple of years. Time to groom a replacement (that's why they WR1 is actually a great need heading into this draft for me). Cobb - Free agent after '18, and hasn't really lived up to his contract. Potentially a cap casualty. Allison - certainly has potential to be a good WR, but he's still a question mark. Davis - has the speed, but skinny as a rail. But hey, so was Donald Driver as a rookie. Needs to fill out, but certainly not a sure thing. Janis - purely a special teamer, as he cannot track the ball in the air and cannot seem to run the correct routes. Ted Thompson always drafts with the thought in his head, "what does my roster look like two years from now?" Adams is good, but I don't think he's a #1 guy. While I don't think they grab a WR in the 1st round, I will be surprised if they don't grab one in the 2nd or 3rd.

Just to throw some water on this idea, there is no way that a team will give up a mid 1st rounder for Hundley & a 3rd round pick. Hundley needs to put a full preseason of game tape against better opposition for him to be worth that. He was robbed of that opportunity with his injury last year.

Full quote from Cravy:

Jungmann made the team, while both Cravy and Scahill were cut (and both are incredibly upset), so there is an outside move coming. It sounds like Scahill will report to AAA while Cravy went nuclear in his comments to reporters. Cravy may quit and look for "a 9-5 job where I'm treated like a human" and that "I'm not sure I want to play for guys that treat you like this." Both Scahill and Cravy were told they were in an open competition for jobs, pitched great, and then were cut anyways.

Revis cannot play corner anymore, probably not even in the slot. He has lost his speed. He may be an effective safety, but that position is probably in the best shape on the defense right now with HHCD & Burnett with some prospects in Evans & Brice. And you know Revis is going to think he's worth at least $6M, which isn't going to happen.

After the 2014 season ended, they declined the 5th year option on Perry's rookie contract. So the 2015 season was also a contract year. What was different about 2016 than 2015? It certainly can't be effort, which you are implying. He had just as much financial incentive to "turn it on" in 2015 than he did in 2016. My belief is his production went up as he gained more opportunity with Matthews being hurt and limiting Peppers' snap count. In 2014 & 2015, Perry played on about 33% of the defensive plays. In 2016, that number jumped up to about 60% (first among Packers OLB and second behind Joe Thomas for players in the front 7), and his production increased. It's fair to say that his bad injury luck has hampered his production, especially the first two years he was here. But he's never struck me as a guy in the Cletidus Hunt mold (ugh, darn me for making everyone even remember that guy) who just fell apart after getting paid.

If Doug Melvin is still advising Stearns, I imagine he's already texted him something like, "Pass on Lawrie. Not with the headaches, and that."

One of the theme nights will be based on Game of Thrones. http://m.mlb.com/brewers/tickets/theme-tickets It doesn't specifically say what the giveaway item is, but I'm hoping for a Ned Stark bobblehead.