Finding the 2023 Starting Catcher

[SF70]

4 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

I like Mitchell as much as anyone, but he's still got a ways to go before becoming a superstar. His K rate during his short MLB stint is concerning and he has yet to tap into his raw power, with his swing plane continuing to hold him back in that regard. 

Also, we are not going to have enough room for all of these outfielders. One of them will eventually have to be traded. With Chourio rocketing through the minors, Frelick the best pure hitter, and Wiemer the ideal RF candidate, Mitchell does become expendable if we can get a valuable piece in return. Jansen would certainly be that as a potential all-star upgrade over Caratini/Feliciano. 

No, you don’t trade a Mitchell unless you’re fairly certain he’s not going to reach his ceiling. 

[Brewcrew82]

27 minutes ago, SF70 said:

No, you don’t trade a Mitchell unless you’re fairly certain he’s not going to reach his ceiling. 

Let's put it this way, I'm more confident in Chourio and Frelick reaching their ceilings than I am Mitchell. There's a reason why those guys are showing up all over prospect lists and Mitchell hasn't in a while now. Mitchell's swing continues to prevent him from tapping into his raw power and his K rate remains a concern. A talented player no doubt, but still down a tier from those guys. Given our OF depth, he could prove to be expendable in the right trade, as you generally have to give talent to get talent. 

[SF70]

58 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Let's put it this way, I'm more confident in Chourio and Frelick reaching their ceilings than I am Mitchell. There's a reason why those guys are showing up all over prospect lists and Mitchell hasn't in a while now. Mitchell's swing continues to prevent him from tapping into his raw power and his K rate remains a concern. A talented player no doubt, but still down a tier from those guys. Given our OF depth, he could prove to be expendable in the right trade, as you generally have to give talent to get talent. 

Mitchell’s potential is off the charts. That doesn’t get traded. That gets kept. That’s my opinion, but I’m not trading what could eventually become a superstar player. Nope.

[Brewcrew82]

24 minutes ago, SF70 said:

Mitchell’s potential is off the charts. That doesn’t get traded. That gets kept. That’s my opinion, but I’m not trading what could eventually become a superstar player. Nope.

Not unless he totally revamps his swing to get more loft and tap into the raw power. He's already 24 and hasn't produced more than average power in the minors. A superstar outfielder, such as the Acunas and Rodriguezes of the world, hits for power in addition to everything else. Chourio is the one whose potential is off the charts and is a potential superstar. 

[Robocaller]

24 minutes ago, SF70 said:

Mitchell’s potential is off the charts. That doesn’t get traded. That gets kept. That’s my opinion, but I’m not trading what could eventually become a superstar player. Nope.

I don't think "superstar" is his ceiling. His ceiling is hitting around .300, with ~20HR and ~35SB, with excellent fielding. That's very valuable, but not superstar. Plus he has injury concerns. 

 

[Brewcrew82]

17 minutes ago, Robocaller said:

I don't think "superstar" is his ceiling. His ceiling is hitting around .300, with ~20HR and ~35SB, with excellent fielding. That's very valuable, but not superstar. Plus he has injury concerns. 

 

20 home runs is even getting generous. I've got him as more of a .280, 12-17 HR, 30 SB player if everything goes right on his current trajectory. Granted, with his fielding that would still around a 4 WAR player. But, yes, short of a superstar and someone whose floor is below that of Frelick, for comparison. A left-handed Harrison Bader, basically. 

[Robocaller]

On 10/27/2022 at 6:32 AM, SF70 said:

I’ll take Vasquez at $8M/year for 3 years, and pass at anything more than that.

Vasquez doesn't deserve a pay raise. I wouldn't sign him for more than 2y@$5M dollars, and I think that's too much.

[Robocaller]

7 hours ago, nate82 said:

How about trading Woodruff to the Angels for Logan O'Hoppe, Ky Bush and Alejandro Hidalgo.  Brewers get the Angels 1, 4 and 22 ranked prospects.  O'Hoppe is MLB ready at catcher and could split time with Caratini in '23 and Feliciano in '24.

This gives the Angels a good starting pitcher in Woodruff and the Brewers get a young catcher a promising LHP and an intriguing RHP.  

In my "blueprint," I included a trade of Woodruff to the Angels for O'Hoppe, Quero (doubling down on catchers), and Silseth .  In retrospect, I don't know if that's the best return for Woodruff. 
Using the baseball trade values site, we could get another good prospect in addition to your 3 guys, maybe Silseth.

[Brewcrew82]

Just now, Robocaller said:

In my "blueprint," I included a trade of Woodruff to the Angels for O'Hoppe, Quero (doubling down on catchers), and Silseth .  In retrospect, I don't know if that's the best return for Woodruff. 
Using the baseball trade values site, we could get another good prospect in addition to your 3 guys, maybe Silseth.

BTV is pretty off on Woodruff's value, imo. No reason there should be a 40 MTV difference between Woody and Burnes. 

Better measuring stick is the Castillo trade. So, two top 100 prospects to begin. O'Hoppe is a great start. Unfortunately, the Angels lack a clear, top 100 level arm. 

[Robocaller]

3 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

BTV is pretty off on Woodruff's value, imo. No reason there should be a 40 MTV difference between Woody and Burnes. 

Better measuring stick is the Castillo trade. So, two top 100 prospects to begin. O'Hoppe is a great start. Unfortunately, the Angels lack a clear, top 100 level arm. 

The Angels do have a pretty weak system,  so it is hard to get value from them. I did like getting O'Hoppe and Quero (we'd have an overabundance of quality catchers), 

[SF70]

27 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Not unless he totally revamps his swing to get more loft and tap into the raw power. He's already 24 and hasn't produced more than average power in the minors. A superstar outfielder, such as the Acunas and Rodriguezes of the world, hits for power in addition to everything else. Chourio is the one whose potential is off the charts and is a potential superstar. 

He’s hasn’t even played a full season of minors games yet. He’s an incredible talent. I want to see him play baseball before I trade him.

[Brewcrew82]

Just now, SF70 said:

He’s hasn’t even played a full season of minors games yet. He’s an incredible talent. I want to see him play baseball before I trade him.

It's not just the minors. It's his entire college career until now that's been the story with him. Great raw power, yet doesn't show it in games or have the swing to be able to consistently do so. Also, injury prone. Again, there's a reason why a guy like Chourio is a top 10 prospect and Mitchell is left off entirely. The superstar outcome just isn't likely with him. 

[SF70]

1 minute ago, Brewcrew82 said:

It's not just the minors. It's his entire college career until now that's been the story with him. Great raw power, yet doesn't show it in games or have the swing to be able to consistently do so. Also, injury prone. Again, there's a reason why a guy like Chourio is a top 10 prospect and Mitchell is left off entirely. The superstar outcome just isn't likely with him. 

Put it this way, I’m not trading him this offseason. He gets a full season from me first.

[Brewcrew82]

30 minutes ago, SF70 said:

Put it this way, I’m not trading him this offseason. He gets a full season from me first.

That's fair. But I don't think it's grounded in reality to label him a future superstar. You have to give  talent to get talent and Mitchell for Jansen would represent a fair, sensible swap for both sides. 

[SF70]

16 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

That's fair. But I don't think it's grounded in reality to label him a future superstar. You have to give  talent to get talent and Mitchell for Jansen would represent a fair, sensible swap for both sides. 

“Potential” — future superstar.

[Brewcrew82]

42 minutes ago, SF70 said:

“Potential” — future superstar.

Okay. It's not grounded in reality to cast him as a potential or future superstar. He would need a complete swing overhaul and has not shown the production commensurate with a superstar at any level. 

[Hopper]

[Devinep]

1 hour ago, SF70 said:

“Potential” — future superstar.

You can say it like 19 more times but it doesn’t make is realistic to think he’s a got any more than a slight chance to be a “superstar.” If he’s untouchable to you then I guess there are about 100 untouchable prospects in baseball.  

[SF70]

1 minute ago, Devinep said:

You can say it like 19 more times but it doesn’t make is realistic to think he’s a got any more than a slight chance to be a “superstar.” If he’s untouchable to you then I guess there are about 100 untouchable prospects in baseball.  

I’m not saying a superstar is on the way. Only that I’m not trading a talent like him until I see what he can do. 

[Brewcrew82]

52 minutes ago, Hopper said:

Insightful as always. 

[Brewcrew82]

14 minutes ago, SF70 said:

I’m not saying a superstar is on the way. Only that I’m not trading a talent like him until I see what he can do. 

But you are using the word "superstar". You're the only one I've heard use that word re. Mitchell. And when you say "a talent like him", as the previous poster stated, you're talking about like 100-150 other minor league players. So, basically you're never in favor of trading top prospects until you've seen them personally for over a year? 

[SF70]

10 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

But you are using the word "superstar". You're the only one I've heard use that word re. Mitchell. And when you say "a talent like him", as the previous poster stated, you're talking about like 100-150 other minor league players. So, basically you're never in favor of trading top prospects until you've seen them personally for over a year? 

Ok, if you can’t get past me using the word potential superstar, then my mistake for using that description in the first place. He doesn’t need to reach that status to be untradable at this point in his career.

Mitchell is one of the fastest players in baseball. Has a near cannon for an arm. Is gifted defensively. Has big-time raw power. A fast bat. A good batting eye. And good plate discipline.

There are not 100-150 players like him. Pure tools & talent, he’s as close to a unicorn as a prospect can get imo. And since he’s talented enough to have reached the big-leagues, and had some success, after only playing in 120 minor league games, I’m not trading that potential off, not yet, not until I see what he can do with more big-league development.

 

[Brewcrew82]

5 hours ago, SF70 said:

Ok, if you can’t get past me using the word potential superstar, then my mistake for using that description in the first place. He doesn’t need to reach that status to be untradable at this point in his career.

Mitchell is one of the fastest players in baseball. Has a near cannon for an arm. Is gifted defensively. Has big-time raw power. A fast bat. A good batting eye. And good plate discipline.

There are not 100-150 players like him. Pure tools & talent, he’s as close to a unicorn as a prospect can get imo. And since he’s talented enough to have reached the big-leagues, and had some success, after only playing in 120 minor league games, I’m not trading that potential off, not yet, not until I see what he can do with more big-league development.

 

Just in our farm system Chourio and Wiemer have just as good of, if not better, tools. And then there's Corbin Carroll, Pete Crow Armstrong, Colton Cowser, Elijah Greene, Zac Veen, etc. That's no "unicorn". Difference is those guys actually have the ability to access their raw power whereas Mitchell doesn't. Which is why they're top 100 prospects and Mitchell isn't. Superstar or unicorn, neither of those terms applies to Mitchell right now nor is particularly likely to in the future. 

[SF70]

24 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Just in our farm system Chourio and Wiemer have just as good of, if not better, tools. And then there's Corbin Carroll, Pete Crow Armstrong, Colton Cowser, Elijah Greene, Zac Veen, etc. That's no "unicorn". Difference is those guys actually have the ability to access their raw power whereas Mitchell doesn't. Which is why they're top 100 prospects and Mitchell isn't. Superstar or unicorn, neither of those terms applies to Mitchell right now nor is particularly likely to in the future. 

Carroll is the only one of the players you mentioned that approaches Mitchell’s speed, and while I love both Chourio & Wiemer’s tools, neither have Mitchell’s game-changing speed.

And Mitchell was a top 100 prospect that fell-out due mostly to not being able to stay on the field. But now after the season he had should be back in the top 100 again.

But you go ahead and trade Mitchell and CRod for 2 years of Jansen, while I keep them in this organization, and figure out a different trade package or sign a Vasquez until Quero is ready.

[Brewcrew82]

2 hours ago, SF70 said:

Carroll is the only one of the players you mentioned that approaches Mitchell’s speed, and while I love both Chourio & Wiemer’s tools, neither have Mitchell’s game-changing speed.

And Mitchell was a top 100 prospect that fell-out due mostly to not being able to stay on the field. But now after the season he had should be back in the top 100 again.

But you go ahead and trade Mitchell and CRod for 2 years of Jansen, while I keep them in this organization, and figure out a different trade package or sign a Vasquez until Quero is ready.

"Carroll is the only one of the player you mentioned that approaches Mitchell's speed". Carroll not only approaches Mitchell's speed, he exceeds it. He was only the fastest player in the majors this year.

"And while I love both Chourio and Wiemer's tools, neither have Mitchell's game changing speed." Chourio most definitely has similar game-changing speed. They're both 70-grade runners. And if what you care about is speed, then what about Esteury Ruiz? Ruiz showed more power in the minors this season than Mitchell ever has...

"And Mitchell was a top 100 prospect that fell-out due mostly to not being able to stay on the field" And Mitchell was able to stay on the field this season? Did he not spend a significant chunk of time  once again this year on the IL?? Also, it was not his inability to stay on the field that sent him off top 100 lists. It was that IN COMBINATION with his continued inability to access his raw power on the field as a result of his swing. 

Overall, Mitchell is not a unicorn or a potential superstar right now. That's just wishful fan thinking on your part. Do I wish you were right? Of course. But I also see his career stats and scouting report, the upcoming OF roster crunch, and the presence of other holes on our roster. In that light, trading a talented prospect like Mitchell for a sleeper slugging catcher like Jansen isn't as asinine as you're making it out to be.