Question of the week: Are you ready to move on from Jed?

[PeanutPunch33]

Just now, Jason Ross said:

I'll just cut to the chase: the Giants fired Zaidi for Buster Posey. How's that going for them?

Firing Zaidi was the right move for the Giants.  Even if their replacement is not working out.  

I do agree that if the Cubs make a move it has to be for a legitimate upgrade and not some old WS Hero.  Lol as much as I dislike Jed I wouldn't want to see him fired and replaced with John Lackey.  

[mul21]

3 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

I was happy when the Cubs got Bregman for sure and honestly, that move is the least of my worries at the moment.  I think a lot of people knew from day 1 that the Swanson acquisition would be a disaster, that the Cabrera move would not work out, that getting Taillon was pointless when the team was supposed to be rebuilding.  

Which of the other 3 FA SS from that offseason did you prefer and how much better has Swanson been than that guy thus far?  The Cubs needed a SS, he checked a bunch of boxes, and he's been better and cheaper than all those guys since they signed their deals.  And if the defense here is they could have just had Nico that at SS, then what 2B has been better in that time frame they could have signed that offseason?

[squally1313]

5 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Aside from PCA, he got next to nothing for Bryant, Rizzo, Schwarber, Contreras. 

Apologies for nitpicking here. I think your criticism is somewhat valid, but I think it's a little misguided, and also doesn't really fairly present the picture.

• Kris Bryant: Kilian and Canario. Both spent some time on top prospect lists, both found the major leagues, neither did anything of value for us or really anyone else. Bad trade.
• Rizzo: Alcantara has been on top 100 lists for years now. We haven't done anything with him, which I think is an indictment on roster building/prospect hoarding, but I think the trade was fine.
• Schwarber: Yeah, sure, the 243 HRs he's hit since we didn't tender him make this a mistake. But I also laugh at the thought of what the group generally on your side of the arguments would have thought about an overweight, fringe COF/likely DH hitting .188 with a 30%+ K rate.
• Contreras: Jaxon Wiggins in the comp pick. Pretty good, no?

Basically, the trades have been fine for how the talent has been perceived. You're not going to hit all of them, and these were all expiring, non elite players. But we're also missing the Ben Brown trade. The Busch trade looks pretty good to me. Getting Paredes for Morel was a big part of getting an elite RF that got us to 92 wins. I know it's a whole exercise to evaluate the, what, 7 year run. But ignoring the Brown trade, specifically, kinda screams of unfair treatment. 

[Jason Ross]

4 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Firing Zaidi was the right move for the Giants.  Even if their replacement is not working out.  

I do agree that if the Cubs make a move it has to be for a legitimate upgrade and not some old WS Hero.  Lol as much as I dislike Jed I wouldn't want to see him fired and replaced with John Lackey.  

But that's the entire point I'm making here. Nothing here is to suggest Jed Hoyer cannot be upgraded upon (I've said it a hanful of times). But everyone here pissing and moaning seem to think that all the Cubs have to do is fire Jed Hoyer and everything will be better. The reality is that even if you bring in the most exciting guy from a strong organization (David Sterns) the outcomes aren't guaranteed.

What the Cubs have currently is a baseball ops guy (he isn't a GM, we need to stop calling him a GM) who has for a fourth year in a row put the Cubs in a contention bubble. Is that the end goal? No, which is why I have been consistent in that Hoyer can be improved on. But that the likely replacement is something similar to this; someone who puts the Cubs in a contention bubble most years. Even what seems like a slam dunk hire (Sterns to the financially insane Mets remains a gold standard for this) might not be.

I'm not saying "Save Jed Hoyer at all costs". What I'm trying to say is that I think a lot of people here haven't thought through this very well and that there's a lot of downsides to just firing Hoyer. And firing Hoyer today does nothing. 

If there's someone out there who is better, I'm all for making that point and looking into it. But it's an offseason question first and foremost.

[PeanutPunch33]

1 minute ago, mul21 said:

Which of the other 3 FA SS from that offseason did you prefer and how much better has Swanson been than that guy thus far?  The Cubs needed a SS, he checked a bunch of boxes, and he's been better and cheaper than all those guys since they signed their deals.  And if the defense here is they could have just had Nico that at SS, then what 2B has been better in that time frame they could have signed that offseason?

My position is the latter.  Why did they need a SS?  They already had one in Nico Hoerner.  If I recall, he graded out as a top 6 or 7 defensive SS the season before the Cubs got Swanson.  Just an incredibly poor use of resources. 

The Cubs were nowhere close to competing in 2022/2023 so that move made no sense.  They should have continued growing organically and developing thru the draft.  Or maybe they could have gotten a targeted a young 2B prospect when they traded all those WS heroes.  

[Jason Ross]

5 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

My position is the latter.  Why did they need a SS?  They already had one in Nico Hoerner.  If I recall, he graded out as a top 6 or 7 defensive SS the season before the Cubs got Swanson.  Just an incredibly poor use of resources. 

The Cubs were nowhere close to competing in 2022/2023 so that move made no sense.  They should have continued growing organically and developing thru the draft.  Or maybe they could have gotten a targeted a young 2B prospect when they traded all those WS heroes.  

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth here. Remember "Six years no pennant"? Do you think that by "developing through the draft" would have made a pennant happen...quicker? 

The Cubs signed a good player to  contract that has been worth every penny so far. You can't both be mad that the Cubs got better immediately but also blame Hoyer for not winning immediately. The reason the Cubs haven't had a pennant is not on Swasnon so far. Nor would have "building through the draft" more (which the Cubs have done very well, IMO) sped that up. 

We can't both be upset that the Cubs didn't win immediate and then also tell them to have slowed down. 

There are real flaws with the Cubs. At some point I think they need to take the bullpen more seriously. They should probably be less afraid to pay big ticket FA SP's. They were slow on velocity development. These are three right off the top of my head. I think you can directly trace all of those right back to Jed. But Swanson ain't the issue.

[mul21]

2 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

My position is the latter.  Why did they need a SS?  They already had one in Nico Hoerner.  If I recall, he graded out as a top 6 or 7 defensive SS the season before the Cubs got Swanson.  Just an incredibly poor use of resources. 

The Cubs were nowhere close to competing in 2022/2023 so that move made no sense.  They should have continued growing organically and developing thru the draft.  Or maybe they could have gotten a targeted a young 2B prospect when they traded all those WS heroes.  

Okay, but who?  You can't just say they should have grabbed a 2B and move on with the criticism without a viable solution.

[Rcal10]

12 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Okay, there's a lot to unpack here but let me just start by saying it's funny that you write 4 paragraphs ardently defending the guy, right after you call him a good GM, just to leave yourself an out "by the way, I'm not saying the Cubs have been amazing".  Lol what exactly is the point of a baseball GM?  To produce teams that are "not amazing?".  I'm not twisting your words, those are your own words being repeated back to you.  The Cubs are hardly better off today (year 6 of this GM) than they were the day he inherited a wildcard team at the end of 2020.  

Anyways, you are hyper focused on the "cornerstone" comment while ignoring literally every other point I made - why don't you discuss the abomination that is this starting rotation?  How's the Phil Maton signing going?  How many guys do they have in this bullpen that can throw 97+ mph?  Lol one or two?  Why is the lack of velocity a year-over-year issue if he's a good GM?

"The Cubs have 0 pennants in 6 years but most teams do" ... yeah most teams can't spend $250 million on payroll and have basically unlimited resources to build a baseball team.  Also, 6 years is not an "incredibly small amount of time".  Most GMs are out of a job by then or on the hot seat if there aren't serious results on the field.  See:  Chaim Bloom, Jerry Dipoto, Ben Cherington, Al Avila, Kevin Towers, (fired after his 7th season), Farhan Zaidi.  

Now, I'll discuss your "cornerstone" rebuttal:  at the end of the day, GMs have to be measured relative to each other.  The White Sox rebuilt their entire lineup in what, year 3 of a new GM.  Do you think the White Sox have a fraction of the resources or analytics infrastructure that the Cubs have?  The Brewers rebuild their team every few years.  The Cardinals always seem to have young studs on the way.  Even in the years they aren't great, it's never due to a lack of young talent.  I'd argue that even the Pirates are now better positioned for the future than the Cubs are.  If you don't think 6 years is enough time to build a contending team, take a look around the league.  Hell, look around the division. 

Yes, PCA is playing like a mega-star and Hoyer deserves credit for that.  It was strongly implied in my comment that the Cubs need more than one player like that (like, you know, every other contending team has).  Aside from PCA, he got next to nothing for Bryant, Rizzo, Schwarber, Contreras.  His drafts haven't been great... his free agent signings haven't been great... so what exactly makes him "pretty good"?   He also signed Swanson to a mega contract during the supposed "budget cut" that you keep referencing.  Maybe there was a budget cut after that because the owner didn't trust the GM to spend his money on mediocre players?  

Anyways, it seems like you concede that Hoyer can be upgraded and as long as that's your position - everything else we discuss is just air.  I agree that they can't just pick a random guy to replace him lol. But, they absolutely should be trying to be great instead of settling for mediocre or average.

The Hoyer situation reminds a bit of when the Giants fired Farhan Zaidi, tbh.  I don't see why Jed's fate should be any different.  

Your “mega star” criteria and all contending teams have more than 1 of them is just a ridiculous take. Who deems a guy a mega star? What criteria is used? Is it the numbers that player puts up in the year the team you are referring to won a WS? Is it career achievement, even if that particular year he wasn’t that good? I don’t agree with a lot of what you said, but just focusing on this one issue, please define “mega star” and tell me the two on each team competing for the playoffs this year. 

Who are Seattle’s two mega stars?, Rays, Padres, Guardians, Braves, Brewers, etc….

 

[PeanutPunch33]

14 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Apologies for nitpicking here. I think your criticism is somewhat valid, but I think it's a little misguided, and also doesn't really fairly present the picture.

• Kris Bryant: Kilian and Canario. Both spent some time on top prospect lists, both found the major leagues, neither did anything of value for us or really anyone else. Bad trade.
• Rizzo: Alcantara has been on top 100 lists for years now. We haven't done anything with him, which I think is an indictment on roster building/prospect hoarding, but I think the trade was fine.
• Schwarber: Yeah, sure, the 243 HRs he's hit since we didn't tender him make this a mistake. But I also laugh at the thought of what the group generally on your side of the arguments would have thought about an overweight, fringe COF/likely DH hitting .188 with a 30%+ K rate.
• Contreras: Jaxon Wiggins in the comp pick. Pretty good, no?

Basically, the trades have been fine for how the talent has been perceived. You're not going to hit all of them, and these were all expiring, non elite players. But we're also missing the Ben Brown trade. The Busch trade looks pretty good to me. Getting Paredes for Morel was a big part of getting an elite RF that got us to 92 wins. I know it's a whole exercise to evaluate the, what, 7 year run. But ignoring the Brown trade, specifically, kinda screams of unfair treatment. 

That's fair, but if they traded Contreras when he had 1.5 years of control (especially when he could still play Catcher) it would have netted them 3 or 4 legit prospects.  They did get the comp pick and Wiggins but at the time, it was a really bad non-move.  If I recall, the Marlins got a haul for JT Realmuto under similar circumstances.  

I just hate that they didn't go through the tried and tested method that Theo put forward - punt a couple of seasons to eventually have studs around the diamond and controlled young talent.  I don't think anyone cares anymore that the White Sox lost what, 121 games in 2024.  Now they have the #1 pick while also being on their way to the playoffs. 

It seems like this GM wanted to bring the Cubs back to relevancy as soon as possible (which is admirable) but the strategy has not worked.  They are perfectly mediocre.  

Edited June 16 by PeanutPunch33

[Outshined_One]

1 minute ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Firing Zaidi was the right move for the Giants.  Even if their replacement is not working out.  

I do agree that if the Cubs make a move it has to be for a legitimate upgrade and not some old WS Hero.  Lol as much as I dislike Jed I wouldn't want to see him fired and replaced with John Lackey.  

It's why I said he was a B grade GM.  You can do better, but, objectively, you can do worse.  A lot worse.

The problem is that it's easy to demand firing Jed, but difficult to find an improvement over him.  If you look at the most successful teams of the last decade, those teams either have had the benefit of ludicrously deep pockets (Dodgers, Yankees), an impressive combination of luck and player development (Brewers, Guardians, Braves), or are the Astros (Astros).

I don't think the GMs of those teams are going anywhere, so you'd either need to luck out in hiring someone's lieutenant or have a Theo situation with Andrew Friedman.  It's possible, don't get me wrong, but people need to be realistic when having these discussions instead of turning into a Score caller demanding the Cubs hire Mike Ditka as a motivational coach because everyone's a bunch of bums.

[Outshined_One]

Also, this chart is a few months old, but here is a list of every team's wins over the last decade:

First, that Dodgers number is horsefeathers insane.

Second, Theo obviously gets credit for 2016-2020, but Jed's held up enough of his end of the bargain to keep the Cubs in the upper third for win totals.  If your goal is to get closer to the Brewers/Guardians, fine, but you again run into the issue of finding someone who can actually pull that off, and you damn well better be sure that the guy you get is the one who can do it.

[PeanutPunch33]

9 minutes ago, mul21 said:

Okay, but who?  You can't just say they should have grabbed a 2B and move on with the criticism without a viable solution.

But why did they have to answer this question in 2022?  They were nowhere close to competing for a title.  Clearly, paying for an expensive SS (or even 2B) would not have made them this suddenly great team.  Sometimes the best moves you make are the ones you don't make.  

I personally would have spend 3 seasons tanking until there was a legit prospect at nearly every position, like They did.  The 2B/SS question wasn't one they needed to answer 1 year into (what should have been) a rebuild.  

[mul21]

4 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

I just hate that they didn't go through the tried and tested method that Theo put forward - punt a couple of seasons to eventually have studs around the diamond and controlled young talent.  I don't think anyone cares anymore that the White Sox lost what, 121 games in 2024.  Now they have the #1 pick while also being on their way to the playoffs. 

You realize that the rules are completely different now than they were when Theo did that and it's a much more difficult gambit at this point right?  Also, this is the Sox record since 2013.  Hard pass.

[PeanutPunch33]

12 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth here. Remember "Six years no pennant"? Do you think that by "developing through the draft" would have made a pennant happen...quicker? 

The Cubs signed a good player to  contract that has been worth every penny so far. You can't both be mad that the Cubs got better immediately but also blame Hoyer for not winning immediately. The reason the Cubs haven't had a pennant is not on Swasnon so far. Nor would have "building through the draft" more (which the Cubs have done very well, IMO) sped that up. 

We can't both be upset that the Cubs didn't win immediate and then also tell them to have slowed down. 

There are real flaws with the Cubs. At some point I think they need to take the bullpen more seriously. They should probably be less afraid to pay big ticket FA SP's. They were slow on velocity development. These are three right off the top of my head. I think you can directly trace all of those right back to Jed. But Swanson ain't the issue.

The context matters here - Jed clearly attempted to compete pretty much right away by handing out contracts to Taillon, Swanson, Suzuki, and so on.  So he has to be measured as a GM who's tried to build a contender for 5 seasons.  If he came out like Theo did and said that we'd have a couple of difficult seasons to build up the farm, the analysis would be different.  Why should he get the benefit of the doubt when he's handed out bad contract after bad contract?   

The moment he signed Swanson, Suzuki, Taillon etc. the message was clear:  we are trying to win.  I just think they made these moves too soon with where the org was at the time.  

[Outshined_One]

Just now, PeanutPunch33 said:

I personally would have spend 3 seasons tanking until there was a legit prospect at nearly every position, like They did.  The 2B/SS question wasn't one they needed to answer 1 year into (what should have been) a rebuild.  

Apples to oranges.  MLB implemented a draft lottery in 2023 and included anti-tanking rules to prevent teams from undertaking multi-year tanks.  @Jason Ross probably knows the rules/eligibility better than I do, but it's why the White Sox picked 10th last year despite having the worst record in baseball.

[squally1313]

8 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

But why did they have to answer this question in 2022?  They were nowhere close to competing for a title.  Clearly, paying for an expensive SS (or even 2B) would not have made them this suddenly great team.  Sometimes the best moves you make are the ones you don't make.  

I personally would have spend 3 seasons tanking until there was a legit prospect at nearly every position, like They did.  The 2B/SS question wasn't one they needed to answer 1 year into (what should have been) a rebuild.  

Since that offseason, here is a list of second basemen/shortstop who signed for more than $30m total.

1. Willy Adames (who put up 4.0 fWAR last year and -0.3 fWAR YTD compared to Dansby's 3.3 fWAR last year and 1.1 fWAR YTD)
2. Bo Bichette
3. Jorge Polanco

Edited June 16 by squally1313

[mul21]

2 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

The context matters here - Jed clearly attempted to compete pretty much right away by handing out contracts to Taillon, Swanson, Suzuki, and so on.  So he has to be measured as a GM who's tried to build a contender for 5 seasons.  If he came out like Theo did and said that we'd have a couple of difficult seasons to build up the farm, the analysis would be different.  Why should he get the benefit of the doubt when he's handed out bad contract after bad contract?   

The moment he signed Swanson, Suzuki, Taillon etc. the message was clear:  we are trying to win.  I just think they made these moves too soon with where the org was at the time.  

Please show all of the contracts that have provided less value than dollars spent.

[mul21]

@PeanutPunch33 don't take all this as some unflappable endorsement of Jed, but let's use some actual logic and reason to make the criticisms.  The facts are the pitching hasn't been good enough and the pitching draft/development in the minors hasn't given them enough ammo to use at the MLB level.  Nobody is going to deny that, but complaining about FA contracts that have produced good value vs dollars spent and not understanding how tanking works now are just paths you can't go down without a whole bunch of evidence to support your argument.  I think the fact that the Brewers have been so good (and let's be honest, had a horseshoe up their ass for 6 weeks last season) and are somehow churning out talent left and right with a much lower payroll affects how we all perceive what's happening, but nobody else besides them and the Rays seem to be able to do these things consistently and can't figure out what the secret sauce is.

[Jason Ross]

12 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

The context matters here - Jed clearly attempted to compete pretty much right away by handing out contracts to Taillon, Swanson, Suzuki, and so on.  So he has to be measured as a GM who's tried to build a contender for 5 seasons.  If he came out like Theo did and said that we'd have a couple of difficult seasons to build up the farm, the analysis would be different.  Why should he get the benefit of the doubt when he's handed out bad contract after bad contract?   

The moment he signed Swanson, Suzuki, Taillon etc. the message was clear:  we are trying to win.  I just think they made these moves too soon with where the org was at the time.  

The Cubs in 2021 were a vastly different organization top-to-bottom than Theo took over. Theo got a few years of bad results because he had to fix literally everything. When Hoyer inherited things, the issue wasn't that top to bottom it needed modernizing (and if you think it did, what you're really upset at is Theo).

What he inherited was an owner off of post-covid "biblical losses" and a demand to lower payroll immediately (Yu Darvish trade). And to say he did that "right away" is pretty unfair. He signed all three of those players after 2022...after two full seasons. That isn't "right away", IMO. And frankly, all of those contracts have mostly been fine. Taillon has probably been the worst of the bunch, but he's a pretty "meh" contract to begin with; $15m in this day and age just isn't asking a lot. I know $15m sounds like a ton, but in context of the MLB salary structure? Yeah it's a pretty minor miss.

Not to mention, it isn't like the Cubs haven't drafted and developed well without a slew of top-5 picks. He's traded for players like Pete Crow-Armstrong, drafted Matt Shaw and Cade Horton, and there's a lot of other scouting wins within the system and the draft. His team hasn't batted 1.000, as it's impossible to do so and once you get past the top-5 the MLB draft is unforgiving, but the two biggest "misses" here have been an odd 2020 draft and then a later half 1st round SP who has dealt with injuries on top of developmental issues. 

[Geographyhater8888]

For whatever it’s worth, the Cubs have over $100 million coming off the books next season and a lot of the guys coming off the books are starting pitchers who aren’t very good. Outside of 75% of the infield there’s at least enough contractual flexibility to reshuffle the roster quickly and add quality arms instead of being on the hook for aging players like Sandiego and Philly, who failed to cash in on their championship windows. No guarantees with Jed but at least it’s not a do or die situation. 

Edited June 16 by Geographyhater8888

[PeanutPunch33]

Fair points by all of you.  The Cubs can certainly do a lot worse than Jed.  But I do also think it's fair to be extremely disappointed with the current state of the Cubs.  I mean, take away even one of those 10 game winning streaks (let's assume they went 6-4 instead of 10-0) and you're looking at a sub-500 team, and the worst team in the division. 

It just seems like this team is hanging on by a thread right now, and are closer to being a last place team in the division than competing for the pennant.  I'm sure that's not what you guys had in mind for year 6 of Jed Hoyer.  I thought they turned a corner last year and then they added Bregman to the mix.  Things should be different.  

[Rcal10]

23 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

But why did they have to answer this question in 2022?  They were nowhere close to competing for a title.  Clearly, paying for an expensive SS (or even 2B) would not have made them this suddenly great team.  Sometimes the best moves you make are the ones you don't make.  

I personally would have spend 3 seasons tanking until there was a legit prospect at nearly every position, like They did.  The 2B/SS question wasn't one they needed to answer 1 year into (what should have been) a rebuild.  

They signed Swanson prior to the ‘23 season. And they won 83 games that year. I believe they finished just outside the playoffs. I think one more win against the Dbacks, would have resulted in a trip to the playoffs. I also believe that in early September the Cubs chances of making the playoffs spiked at over 90%. Suggesting they were nowhere close to competing is just a false narrative. They signed Swanson to compete. And they did. They have done so every year since ‘23. 

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Fair points by all of you.  The Cubs can certainly do a lot worse than Jed.  But I do also think it's fair to be extremely disappointed with the current state of the Cubs.  I mean, take away even one of those 10 game winning streaks (let's assume they went 6-4 instead of 10-0) and you're looking at a sub-500 team, and the worst team in the division. 

It just seems like this team is hanging on by a thread right now, and are closer to being a last place team in the division than competing for the pennant.  I'm sure that's not what you guys had in mind for year 6 of Jed Hoyer.  I thought they turned a corner last year and then they added Bregman to the mix.  Things should be different.  

Why are you taking away a 10 game winning streak though. What happens if you take away the 10 game losing streak?

[Rcal10]

18 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Why are you taking away a 10 game winning streak though. What happens if you take away the 10 game losing streak?

Beat me to it. What if they went 4-6 in that losing streak? The. They would be 11 games over .500. They would be looking good at 42-31

Edited June 16 by Rcal10

[Jason Ross]

13 minutes ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Fair points by all of you.  The Cubs can certainly do a lot worse than Jed.  But I do also think it's fair to be extremely disappointed with the current state of the Cubs.  I mean, take away even one of those 10 game winning streaks (let's assume they went 6-4 instead of 10-0) and you're looking at a sub-500 team, and the worst team in the division. 

It just seems like this team is hanging on by a thread right now, and are closer to being a last place team in the division than competing for the pennant.  I'm sure that's not what you guys had in mind for year 6 of Jed Hoyer.  I thought they turned a corner last year and then they added Bregman to the mix.  Things should be different.  

One more thing I'll point out: if all we do is take away the best run of any team this year, their W-L would look a lot worse than it would today. We can do the inverse just as easily: what if instead of taking away a 10-game-winning streak, we took away the 10-game losing streak. I think either would be just as fair to hand-wave away, no?

I'll say this: I'm disappointed how the last month and a half has gone. Part of that is because the Cubs have dealt with a pretty improbable number of pitching injuries. Part of that is that the Cubs patched together a handful of pitchers with arm injuries (however, this is a water-is-wet situation, as now a days most pitchers come with a history of that). Part of that is that players just aren't playing to the level that you'd have expected. Only some of that is Jed's fault. Some of that is bad luck. Some of that is the player's faults.

But even through it all, the Cubs are on an 84-win pace. This has been about as bad of a 45-day run as you could have written down, and I don't think it will continue to be this bad. And I want to remind everyone this, too. Last year, on June 16th the Chicago Cubs had a 5.5 game lead over the Milwaukee Brewers, The Brewers had 39 wins. Today, the Cubs have 38. Let's not act like we haven't seen the script flip on the Cubs, and it's not impossible that the script eventually flips on the Brewers, too.