Hunter Renfroe to Angels for 3 pitchers

[brewcrewdue80]

17 hours ago, Robocaller said:

I'm not sure of that. At least not to any appreciable extent. Alexander was elite (in the minors) at getting ground balls. What's Junk's calling card?

Someone that gets put to reliever where his velocity picks up 1.5-3MPH.  Looks like in 2019 he had the piggyback role coming in games 3rd or 4th inning some 0 runs 3-4IP stints.  Had 1 game last season for Angels clean 1IP.   Looks like 4-7th innings type role as needed for bullpen.  Not so much what Suter did with spot starts. But 1-4IP games hopefully eating innings when bullpen needs relief.

I think Seminaris you're looking at similar duty when shuffled in to Majors.

 

Peguara at 6'5" and that 97+MPH  feels more of your 7th inning guy that maybe develops to 8-10inning should they fix something in him.

You've gained 2-3years in 3 guys of pre-arb salary with options shuttling to be your 5-7th(floor)  depth relievers.

I feel like FO has traded for at least 1 of that potential  reliever each of the last 6 seasons now. Most 1-2yr rentals. They got 3 with near full team control to see if they can solve the constant turnover.

[Brewcrew82]

6 hours ago, BlightyBrew said:

I believe they started it they said my opinion on a topic wasn't based on reality and that I don't live in the real world.  I was only defending myself.

However, if this offended or upset you I do apologize.  My intent is not to upset people.

"They started it." Seriously. Are you a child?

If you actually look at what was said, you will see that my initial response was not directed at anything having to do with your specific opinion on the trade. Rather, you were questioning why other posters didn't happen to see things your way, exclaiming that the truth is "usually simple". I replied that the truth is "generally in between two extremes", as represented by your opinion that the trade was purely a salary dump and in contrast to other posters' opinions that the trade was made to obtain valuable pitching depth and pave the way for our young outfield prospects. So, no, I never said that your opinion on this topic wasn't based on reality. It was, instead, the callous manner in which you were dismissing other peoples' opinions and claiming that the truth is "usually simple" that elicited my subsequent response. 

Again, I realize you're new here, so you may not understand the rules. But taking things to a personal level, in particular, bringing up someone's family, is totally out of bounds. This forum is for baseball, and baseball discussion only. Hence, my encouragement to you to "think more before you post." 

[SeaBass]

20 hours ago, JefferyLeonard said:

Here's the problem. There are a number of posters here, who if the Brewers now turn around and sign someone to a 1 year, $17 mill a year deal, will proudly proclaim "see, they added to the payroll and made a significant signing". Yeah, no. No one year deal is "significant". In order for me to be convinced they are still in "going for it" mode, would be by signing a big bat to a multi year deal, AND resign at least one of Woody, Burnes, Peralta.

The Brewers have been playing year to year since Stearns was hired. Sounds like you're just now catching on.

Hey, anyone remember Avisail Garcia? How bad were we missing him last year? Miami gave him a 4 yr $53M contract and he produced 98 games of a .224/.266/.317 slash. Yet without going back to check I feel like there were fans on this board that felt like the Brewers should have kept Avi instead of trading for Renfroe to replace him. (I understand those moves were only indirectly related.)

Maybe the guys in the front office know what they're doing.

[Harold Hutchison]

18 hours ago, monty57 said:

At the end of the day, I thought Renfroe would be on the opening day roster as RF/DH. That they mad the trade either means:

1) They needed the money, either because they’re broke or they have a better option on which to spend it. 
 

2) They think Frelick is ready to start and can provide production for a lot less than $11M. 
 

3) They really like the guys they got back. 
 

I think options 1 & 2 are more likely than option 3. 

I'm thinking a combo of 2 and 3... with 1 a partial factor (in so far as Frelick/Weimer's emergence means the $11M on Renfroe is not the best way to spend the money).

As for 3, the Brewers probably think they can turn these guys into useful parts of a bullpen, and they will come with a LOT of team control/cheap years. If they have to put a reliable contributor like Brent Suter on waivers... they probably need cheap bullpen arms with multiple minor-league options.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Hey, everybody. Step back and take a deep breath for a moment. We're all fans of the same team, let's get back on topic. Any more thread derailments after this post will be hidden so let's get back on the topic at hand.

[patrickgpe]

22 hours ago, JefferyLeonard said:

Here's the problem. There are a number of posters here, who if the Brewers now turn around and sign someone to a 1 year, $17 mill a year deal, will proudly proclaim "see, they added to the payroll and made a significant signing". Yeah, no. No one year deal is "significant". In order for me to be convinced they are still in "going for it" mode, would be by signing a big bat to a multi year deal, AND resign at least one of Woody, Burnes, Peralta.

Nobody knows how the roster will look in April, but what is wrong if you used the money you were going to pay Hader and Renfroe in 2023 and signed somebody that you feel gives you a better chance for you to win in 2023 to a 1 yr deal, knowing that you have depth in you pen and outfield corp. Yes they may turn around and sell the farm away, but we don’t know that.

Also the brewers did sign Yelich to a big money multi-year deal and bit them in the behind. Sometimes 1 year deals benefit both the player and the club since it limits the risk on the club. 

[AdvantageSchneider]

WIthout a doubt this trade was made to clear some salary and playing time for the young OF prospects.  After taking a deeper dive I think the Brewers may have had some concerns that Refroe would replicate his performance.  If you take a look at his chase rate for his career it is at 33.3% which would put him in the middle of the league overall last year, however his chase rates the last two years are much worse 35.1% and 34.4.  Those chase rates would put him in the bottom quarter of the league.  HIgh chase rates are highly correlated with a sharp decline in offensive production and the decline historically begins with the age 31 season.  

Take a look at McCutchen's chase rates, they are 23.4 for his career.  That's a big reason why he's been able to be an above average hitter into his mid-30s until last year.

I'm not saying Renfroe is going to turn into a pumpkin overnight, but there are definitely reasons to be concerned he would duplicate his career year.  That may have been an additional reason why the Brewers were shopping him so hard.

[Robocaller]

16 hours ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

Someone that gets put to reliever where his velocity picks up 1.5-3MPH.  Looks like in 2019 he had the piggyback role coming in games 3rd or 4th inning some 0 runs 3-4IP stints.  Had 1 game last season for Angels clean 1IP.   Looks like 4-7th innings type role as needed for bullpen.  Not so much what Suter did with spot starts. But 1-4IP games hopefully eating innings when bullpen needs relief.

I think Seminaris you're looking at similar duty when shuffled in to Majors.

 

Peguara at 6'5" and that 97+MPH  feels more of your 7th inning guy that maybe develops to 8-10inning should they fix something in him.

You've gained 2-3years in 3 guys of pre-arb salary with options shuttling to be your 5-7th(floor)  depth relievers.

I feel like FO has traded for at least 1 of that potential  reliever each of the last 6 seasons now. Most 1-2yr rentals. They got 3 with near full team control to see if they can solve the constant turnover.

The chance that all three will have ML careers is vanishingly small. Peguera has the best shot, imo, but all of them are unlikely to be ML successes.

[jay87shot]

I like the idea of Junk in the Suter role, if his stuff can play up a hair in the pen and maybe our pitching team can tweak him a bit. If he throws 93-95 with average secondary stuff he can/could throw a solid 70+ innings making a few spot start and eating up 2 or more innings when needed. I agree with most that Peguro has the most upside that power sinking heater has some nasty to it. If the staff can change/improve his delivery (kind of sling the ball slightly sidearm) and keep the movement he has a good shot as a 7th or 8th inning guy in the not to distant future. The 3rd guy is probably just an organization depth piece like Dylan File or Alec Bettinger for the next couple years.

[Jopal78]

4 hours ago, Robocaller said:

The chance that all three will have ML careers is vanishingly small. Peguera has the best shot, imo, but all of them are unlikely to be ML successes.

I would agree, similar to the pitchers Milwaukee received from Atlanta for Orlando Arcia. That deal was more about moving Arcia than getting contributors back in return. 
 

The Brewers wanted to move on from Renfroe (which if you haven’t read the JS Article— Renfroe wasn’t surprised he was traded) and got three pitchers which maybe  they catch lightning in a bottle with one of them, but all three could very well end up being organizational soldiers. 

[brewcrewdue80]

6 hours ago, Robocaller said:

The chance that all three will have ML careers is vanishingly small. Peguera has the best shot, imo, but all of them are unlikely to be ML successes.

Generally speaking if you are in that 4-7th inning  eat innings role you aren't a big success. The success is Milw pays you 600? 700k? Each of next 3 seasons while playing 24th-26th man. And the team can shuttle Junk-Seminaris-Peguara doing this. I feel like you're  thinking I believe these are 2.5-3.6 ERA/Fip pitchers we just inherited.  All I'm hoping is for 4.0-4.6 ERA/Fip guys to eat up innings. Peguara as mentioned a bit more since he's got length and velocity. But so did Johnny Hellweg. 

It's depth that is cost controlled who all has nothing but upside.  Expectations are low but any single good year can and has been traded for expecting it to continue.(like what I mentioned seems every year for 6years the team has done)  Maybe we can be on the side of good year turns in to a good trade return vs giving up a good return for nothing.

[Hacksaw Jim Duggan]

I am really excited about the Brewers trading Renfroe.  Renfroe was never a core piece.  He hit some dingers and had a cannon for an arm, but he was on the wrong side of 30.  So trading him for three relievers in their mid-twenties is fair in my mind.  I hope the relievers can contribute to the big-league club next year.  

 

The Brewers are a small market team.  Best not get attached to any player.  All are tradeable.  Trading one non-core asset for 3 young non-core assets makes a lot of sense.  Good trade!!!

[wallus]

First of all, it's clear that the trade has nothing to do with Hunter Renfroe to some of you. He is on his fifth team in five years and was going to make 11 million dollars. He is pretty much an average player that we can not afford to invest around 8-10% of our payroll on. The strength of our minors is outfielders and they are in AAA. Not to mention it's still November but the same people freak out every year so this shouldn't be surprising.

It's more about the payroll being less in 2023 which should not be a shock to anyone.

Attendance was way down in 2022 and that affects the Brewers payroll probably more than any other team in MLB. Also, our TV contract is not competitive with other teams. This should be a shared revenue and this was not addressed in the last CBA.

I have to assume Wong will be gone and then we will pickup some cheap vet to play 3B or 2B while we ease Turang in the at the major league level. Are we going to be relying on rookies too much in 2023? Very likely yes but we don't have much of a choice. Fans didn't show up in 2022 and that's part of the reason why.

[Robocaller]

11 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

I would agree, similar to the pitchers Milwaukee received from Atlanta for Orlando Arcia. That deal was more about moving Arcia than getting contributors back in return. 
 

The Brewers wanted to move on from Renfroe (which if you haven’t read the JS Article— Renfroe wasn’t surprised he was traded) and got three pitchers which maybe  they catch lightning in a bottle with one of them, but all three could very well end up being organizational soldiers. 

I think we'll get more than 4 major league innings out of these 3, which is what they got from the two from the Arcia trade.  

[Axman59]

2 hours ago, wallus said:

Fans didn't show up in 2022 and that's part of the reason why.

A lot more fans would have showed up in August and September if the Brewers hadn't traded their closer at the deadline. And I think fans would be a lot more excited for 2023 if that hadn't happened.

 

Edit - I can see why Tampa and Miami struggle at the gate. It has to be hard to emotionally (and financially) invest in a team when you feel like management is going to pull the football away like Lucy at any moment. And Charlie Brown ends up on his back.

[Robocaller]

2 hours ago, wallus said:

First of all, it's clear that the trade has nothing to do with Hunter Renfroe to some of you. He is on his fifth team in five years and was going to make 11 million dollars. He is pretty much an average player that we can not afford to invest around 8-10% of our payroll on. The strength of our minors is outfielders and they are in AAA. Not to mention it's still November but the same people freak out every year so this shouldn't be surprising.

It's more about the payroll being less in 2023 which should not be a shock to anyone.

Attendance was way down in 2022 and that affects the Brewers payroll probably more than any other team in MLB. Also, our TV contract is not competitive with other teams. This should be a shared revenue and this was not addressed in the last CBA.

I have to assume Wong will be gone and then we will pickup some cheap vet to play 3B or 2B while we ease Turang in the at the major league level. Are we going to be relying on rookies too much in 2023? Very likely yes but we don't have much of a choice. Fans didn't show up in 2022 and that's part of the reason why.

He was the best hitter on the team last year, so if he's only an average hitter, the only way dumping him makes sense is if they actually use what would have been his salary to acquire at least one better player.  If they actually do that, my impression of the trade will change.

[Robocaller]

9 hours ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

Generally speaking if you are in that 4-7th inning  eat innings role you aren't a big success. The success is Milw pays you 600? 700k? Each of next 3 seasons while playing 24th-26th man. And the team can shuttle Junk-Seminaris-Peguara doing this. I feel like you're  thinking I believe these are 2.5-3.6 ERA/Fip pitchers we just inherited.  All I'm hoping is for 4.0-4.6 ERA/Fip guys to eat up innings. Peguara as mentioned a bit more since he's got length and velocity. But so did Johnny Hellweg. 

It's depth that is cost controlled who all has nothing but upside.  Expectations are low but any single good year can and has been traded for expecting it to continue.(like what I mentioned seems every year for 6years the team has done)  Maybe we can be on the side of good year turns in to a good trade return vs giving up a good return for nothing.

Your floor for them is much higher than my floor for them, which is they don't pitch another significant inning in the majors. I'm hoping for more, but there's not really much cost savings to pay a rookie $700K a year vs. signing a bunch of retreads who at least have a floor of being a major leaguer, and whom you can acquire with nothing but modest expenditures of money (1-2M per year, if they make the majors).

If one of them has a career as good as Suter has had, I'd consider that to be a success for them. But we have guys in the system who should be able to do that whom wouldn't cost trade capital to acquire.

 

[Harold Hutchison]

4 hours ago, Robocaller said:

Your floor for them is much higher than my floor for them, which is they don't pitch another significant inning in the majors. I'm hoping for more, but there's not really much cost savings to pay a rookie $700K a year vs. signing a bunch of retreads who at least have a floor of being a major leaguer, and whom you can acquire with nothing but modest expenditures of money (1-2M per year, if they make the majors).

If one of them has a career as good as Suter has had, I'd consider that to be a success for them. But we have guys in the system who should be able to do that whom wouldn't cost trade capital to acquire.

 

The Brewers had another need: Room for multiple prospects in the outfield: Frelick, Mitchell, Wiemer, Chourio, Ruiz. This doesn't include Perkins, Taylor, and Yelich as full-time OFs, or guys like Turang and Wong, who've seen time in the OF in their professional careers.

Three pitchers, two of whom could be rotation depth and the third a potential late-inning reliever? Beats the zilch the Crew would get from non-tendering Renfroe or a paltry sum of cash from a waiver claim.

[Robocaller]

2 hours ago, clancyphile said:

The Brewers had another need: Room for multiple prospects in the outfield: Frelick, Mitchell, Wiemer, Chourio, Ruiz. This doesn't include Perkins, Taylor, and Yelich as full-time OFs, or guys like Turang and Wong, who've seen time in the OF in their professional careers.

Three pitchers, two of whom could be rotation depth and the third a potential late-inning reliever? Beats the zilch the Crew would get from non-tendering Renfroe or a paltry sum of cash from a waiver claim.

Renfroe had 2.7 WAR last year. If the 3 receivers we got accumulate that in their careers, they'll be doing better than expected. 
I don't know why you listed Perkins as a full-time OF--if he is, we might as well tank for better draft picks.

 

[UpandIn]

9 hours ago, wallus said:

First of all, it's clear that the trade has nothing to do with Hunter Renfroe to some of you. He is on his fifth team in five years and was going to make 11 million dollars. He is pretty much an average player that we can not afford to invest around 8-10% of our payroll on. The strength of our minors is outfielders and they are in AAA. Not to mention it's still November but the same people freak out every year so this shouldn't be surprising.

It's more about the payroll being less in 2023 which should not be a shock to anyone.

Attendance was way down in 2022 and that affects the Brewers payroll probably more than any other team in MLB. Also, our TV contract is not competitive with other teams. This should be a shared revenue and this was not addressed in the last CBA.

I have to assume Wong will be gone and then we will pickup some cheap vet to play 3B or 2B while we ease Turang in the at the major league level. Are we going to be relying on rookies too much in 2023? Very likely yes but we don't have much of a choice. Fans didn't show up in 2022 and that's part of the reason why.

Again, the "5th team in 5 years," comes up as though it's a good reason for trading him. 

What is the point here? To try and paint him as some malcontent?
To tell you to ignore his production and how it fit...almost perfectly with the Brewers needs(right handed power hitter who hits lefties)?

4 years in SD
Acquired by TB for Jake Crowenworth+Tommy Pham(pretty damn valuable players). Had a terrible year in TB hitting .156, so he was non-tendered by the team with the lowest payroll on average in baseball. 
Signed by Boston. 4th in OPS on one of the best offensive teams in baseball behind Devers, JD Martinez and Boegarts.

Brewers send two prospects, including a 3B prospect 
And then we traded him. 
Never once has there been a suggestion he was a poor clubhouse guy. Just the opposite. 

This argument means absolutely nothing. There is a LOONG list of good players who for whatever quirky reason move around.

#2-The Brewers had lower attendance. They're also getting a pretty significant increase this year in revenue sharing. An estimated bump of 20M+ dollars per year(VERY conservative estimate). In 2018, that was 118M per team and then the share of TV money was 91M. We know TV money and revenue in total are both up. So in 2018, each team got 209M dollars. We know that number is taking a pretty significant jump this year with new TV deals. We know the BREWERS TV deal in increasing. So on balance I'd say what we lost in attendance is relatively insignificant compared to what we lost in attendance. 

This is the reason the MLBPA wanted each team to receive 100M dollars less from revenue sharing. Because the teams like the Pirates, Orioles, Marlins, Rays, As...etc...etc...they weren't spending. What they should have insisted upon was a salary floor, but that's neither here nor there. 

VERY conservatively speaking, we should be looking at ~230M before we account for the 52% of our revenue that doesn't go into MLB's revenue sharing.

So I get the MASSIVE 9 figure differences in local TV money the Brewers get and the LAA/LAD/NYY/NYM/ATL/CHC and the like get...there are also a lot of other costs associated with running a team. The player scouting, development, international FAs, the amateur draft, all those costs. 

#3 Lets circle back now to the trade deadline. What did Attanasio say in that dugout? #3-Attanasio was emphatic that the Brewers could not only add ANY salary in the game last year, there wasn't a single trade they COULD not make for payroll reasons. Not Soto at 17M last year, not his projected ~22M this year, not whatever he was due to make next year. He did then stop and hesitate and say MAYBE a package of 3 players before then again confirming, "no, there was no trade we couldn't make because of payroll."
Was he lying when he said they could have added 17M to last years payroll, they could have added 22M to this years payroll?

I really doubt that's the case. So I'M going to assume that they've got some larger picture and when Attanasio said there COULD be a lot of opportunity this year due to the potential for a lot of moves, that he said so because we might look to shuffle the deck. Cut salary for a couple spots and then look to re-invest elsewhere.  Because that's consistent with what he's been saying and THAT makes sense. If this Brewers team is actually just slashing payroll, then they may as well trade Burnes and Woodruff now(hell, Adames as too) because you can't just get rid of the two best hitters from a team that wasn't good enough and expect to "compete for a world series," as is the stated goal. 

He's since doubled down and talked about building AROUND that core.

 

If that's the plan...GREAT. Losing a RHed hitter on a team already struggled hitting lefties and with a lot of left handed hitters already in the lineup and the most immediate impact players in the farm system coming up through the lineup next year in Mitchell, Frelick and Turang, that doesn't make sense. 

 

 

Bottom line, it's just...BAD business to tear down this roster even more because you had the 14th attendance in MLB as opposed to the 10th highest. 

10 hours ago, wallus said:

It's more about the payroll being less in 2023 which should not be a shock to anyone.

It really should be. Again, anything we LOST in attendance, we're more than making up for with the increased revenue sharing. That coupled with the fact that THIS is the year the front office's believe this year is their chance to win a World Series, I'd be shocked if they cut payroll just for the sake of cutting payroll.

There's no justification for the payroll being below 130M this year...unless they simply manage to acquire young, controllable players via trade, the only other reasons I can come up with would be Attanasio's investment in Norwich(a theory I've never bought) or the idea that this team is servicing debt or they need to spend money on the stadium(also seems rather unlikely that they'd be slashing payroll and pissing off fans to pay for stadium renovations that are still years away when they have Burnes/Woodruff atop their rotation). 

 

 

So AGAIN, I'll trust that this team has a plan to get BETTER. Not to just try and simply slash their payroll to the 110M range. If that's the end goal, then Attanasio and the organization is going to have some explaining to do. NO fan base spends more per capita to support their team(it's not really even that close). 

If you want that and you want the sagging attendance numbers to stay the same or simply stagnate in the mid 2's, cutting payroll would definitely be the way to go. 

 

I don't believe that's the type of owner Attanasio is and I really hope I'm proven right. 

[UpandIn]

47 minutes ago, Robocaller said:

Renfroe had 2.7 WAR last year. If the 3 receivers we got accumulate that in their careers, they'll be doing better than expected. 
I don't know why you listed Perkins as a full-time OF--if he is, we might as well tank for better draft picks.

 

That's not really fair. Perkins crushes righties. He could be an ideal platoon mate for Frelick/Mitchell. A soft platoon as I think it'd be a bad idea to platoon either regularly, but...he could step in vs lefties and do very well

2021 vs Lefties

.298

.412

.474

.886

2022 vs Lefties

.310

.406

.483

.889

That's in 170+ games at AA and AAA playing all over the OF. So maybe he's just a guy who...l.ike most prospects who develop, the power came later and for the Brewers, he'll be a platoon player who fits in perfectly with all our LHed prospects and our bats. 

He COULD and more likely will start in AAA, but this has the feel of a sneaky signing. A player who could play a nice role on the team this year. He's young, 6 years of team control, options and he plays all over. And most importantly, those numbers vs lefties as we're going to be in a LOT of trouble if we can't find someone who can do something vs RHed bats. 

I loathe this trade at the moment. I think we'd have been better off simply keeping Renfroe. CERTAINLY at least until we knew if we could sign Abreu or someone else who can replace that RHed bat in the lineup. But I think you're selling these pitchers a little short. Or maybe it's the Brewers ability to develop pitchers vs that of the Angels. One team is one of the worst, the other has been among the best(at least for the last 5-6 years). 

This is still a trade that's only defensible once the Brewers re-allocate those resources and find a way to add another bat who can hit right handed pitching. Maybe they're going to try and go big and sign Contreras? That'd make plenty of sense. He's a great athlete, solid defender, middle of the order hitter for us and it allows the Brewers to make us of all their MLB ready OF prospects. 

[SF70]

2 hours ago, UpandIn said:

Again, the "5th team in 5 years," comes up as though it's a good reason for trading him. 

What is the point here? To try and paint him as some malcontent?
To tell you to ignore his production and how it fit...almost perfectly with the Brewers needs(right handed power hitter who hits lefties)?

4 years in SD
Acquired by TB for Jake Crowenworth+Tommy Pham(pretty damn valuable players). Had a terrible year in TB hitting .156, so he was non-tendered by the team with the lowest payroll on average in baseball. 
Signed by Boston. 4th in OPS on one of the best offensive teams in baseball behind Devers, JD Martinez and Boegarts.

Brewers send two prospects, including a 3B prospect 
And then we traded him. 
Never once has there been a suggestion he was a poor clubhouse guy. Just the opposite. 

This argument means absolutely nothing. There is a LOONG list of good players who for whatever quirky reason move around.

#2-The Brewers had lower attendance. They're also getting a pretty significant increase this year in revenue sharing. An estimated bump of 20M+ dollars per year(VERY conservative estimate). In 2018, that was 118M per team and then the share of TV money was 91M. We know TV money and revenue in total are both up. So in 2018, each team got 209M dollars. We know that number is taking a pretty significant jump this year with new TV deals. We know the BREWERS TV deal in increasing. So on balance I'd say what we lost in attendance is relatively insignificant compared to what we lost in attendance. 

This is the reason the MLBPA wanted each team to receive 100M dollars less from revenue sharing. Because the teams like the Pirates, Orioles, Marlins, Rays, As...etc...etc...they weren't spending. What they should have insisted upon was a salary floor, but that's neither here nor there. 

VERY conservatively speaking, we should be looking at ~230M before we account for the 52% of our revenue that doesn't go into MLB's revenue sharing.

So I get the MASSIVE 9 figure differences in local TV money the Brewers get and the LAA/LAD/NYY/NYM/ATL/CHC and the like get...there are also a lot of other costs associated with running a team. The player scouting, development, international FAs, the amateur draft, all those costs. 

#3 Lets circle back now to the trade deadline. What did Attanasio say in that dugout? #3-Attanasio was emphatic that the Brewers could not only add ANY salary in the game last year, there wasn't a single trade they COULD not make for payroll reasons. Not Soto at 17M last year, not his projected ~22M this year, not whatever he was due to make next year. He did then stop and hesitate and say MAYBE a package of 3 players before then again confirming, "no, there was no trade we couldn't make because of payroll."
Was he lying when he said they could have added 17M to last years payroll, they could have added 22M to this years payroll?

I really doubt that's the case. So I'M going to assume that they've got some larger picture and when Attanasio said there COULD be a lot of opportunity this year due to the potential for a lot of moves, that he said so because we might look to shuffle the deck. Cut salary for a couple spots and then look to re-invest elsewhere.  Because that's consistent with what he's been saying and THAT makes sense. If this Brewers team is actually just slashing payroll, then they may as well trade Burnes and Woodruff now(hell, Adames as too) because you can't just get rid of the two best hitters from a team that wasn't good enough and expect to "compete for a world series," as is the stated goal. 

He's since doubled down and talked about building AROUND that core.

 

If that's the plan...GREAT. Losing a RHed hitter on a team already struggled hitting lefties and with a lot of left handed hitters already in the lineup and the most immediate impact players in the farm system coming up through the lineup next year in Mitchell, Frelick and Turang, that doesn't make sense. 

 

 

Bottom line, it's just...BAD business to tear down this roster even more because you had the 14th attendance in MLB as opposed to the 10th highest. 

It really should be. Again, anything we LOST in attendance, we're more than making up for with the increased revenue sharing. That coupled with the fact that THIS is the year the front office's believe this year is their chance to win a World Series, I'd be shocked if they cut payroll just for the sake of cutting payroll.

There's no justification for the payroll being below 130M this year...unless they simply manage to acquire young, controllable players via trade, the only other reasons I can come up with would be Attanasio's investment in Norwich(a theory I've never bought) or the idea that this team is servicing debt or they need to spend money on the stadium(also seems rather unlikely that they'd be slashing payroll and pissing off fans to pay for stadium renovations that are still years away when they have Burnes/Woodruff atop their rotation). 

 

 

So AGAIN, I'll trust that this team has a plan to get BETTER. Not to just try and simply slash their payroll to the 110M range. If that's the end goal, then Attanasio and the organization is going to have some explaining to do. NO fan base spends more per capita to support their team(it's not really even that close). 

If you want that and you want the sagging attendance numbers to stay the same or simply stagnate in the mid 2's, cutting payroll would definitely be the way to go. 

 

I don't believe that's the type of owner Attanasio is and I really hope I'm proven right. 

The extra ~10M from the Brewers new local tv deal started last year, and so did the extra ~$8M per team increase in national tv money.

[Jopal78]

6 hours ago, UpandIn said:

Again, the "5th team in 5 years," comes up as though it's a good reason for trading him. 

What is the point here? To try and paint him as some malcontent?
To tell you to ignore his production and how it fit...almost perfectly with the Brewers needs(right handed power hitter who hits lefties)?

4 years in SD
Acquired by TB for Jake Crowenworth+Tommy Pham(pretty damn valuable players). Had a terrible year in TB hitting .156, so he was non-tendered by the team with the lowest payroll on average in baseball. 
Signed by Boston. 4th in OPS on one of the best offensive teams in baseball behind Devers, JD Martinez and Boegarts.

Brewers send two prospects, including a 3B prospect 
And then we traded him. 
Never once has there been a suggestion he was a poor clubhouse guy. Just the opposite. 

This argument means absolutely nothing. There is a LOONG list of good players who for whatever quirky reason move around.

#2-The Brewers had lower attendance. They're also getting a pretty significant increase this year in revenue sharing. An estimated bump of 20M+ dollars per year(VERY conservative estimate). In 2018, that was 118M per team and then the share of TV money was 91M. We know TV money and revenue in total are both up. So in 2018, each team got 209M dollars. We know that number is taking a pretty significant jump this year with new TV deals. We know the BREWERS TV deal in increasing. So on balance I'd say what we lost in attendance is relatively insignificant compared to what we lost in attendance. 

This is the reason the MLBPA wanted each team to receive 100M dollars less from revenue sharing. Because the teams like the Pirates, Orioles, Marlins, Rays, As...etc...etc...they weren't spending. What they should have insisted upon was a salary floor, but that's neither here nor there. 

VERY conservatively speaking, we should be looking at ~230M before we account for the 52% of our revenue that doesn't go into MLB's revenue sharing.

So I get the MASSIVE 9 figure differences in local TV money the Brewers get and the LAA/LAD/NYY/NYM/ATL/CHC and the like get...there are also a lot of other costs associated with running a team. The player scouting, development, international FAs, the amateur draft, all those costs. 

#3 Lets circle back now to the trade deadline. What did Attanasio say in that dugout? #3-Attanasio was emphatic that the Brewers could not only add ANY salary in the game last year, there wasn't a single trade they COULD not make for payroll reasons. Not Soto at 17M last year, not his projected ~22M this year, not whatever he was due to make next year. He did then stop and hesitate and say MAYBE a package of 3 players before then again confirming, "no, there was no trade we couldn't make because of payroll."
Was he lying when he said they could have added 17M to last years payroll, they could have added 22M to this years payroll?

I really doubt that's the case. So I'M going to assume that they've got some larger picture and when Attanasio said there COULD be a lot of opportunity this year due to the potential for a lot of moves, that he said so because we might look to shuffle the deck. Cut salary for a couple spots and then look to re-invest elsewhere.  Because that's consistent with what he's been saying and THAT makes sense. If this Brewers team is actually just slashing payroll, then they may as well trade Burnes and Woodruff now(hell, Adames as too) because you can't just get rid of the two best hitters from a team that wasn't good enough and expect to "compete for a world series," as is the stated goal. 

He's since doubled down and talked about building AROUND that core.

 

If that's the plan...GREAT. Losing a RHed hitter on a team already struggled hitting lefties and with a lot of left handed hitters already in the lineup and the most immediate impact players in the farm system coming up through the lineup next year in Mitchell, Frelick and Turang, that doesn't make sense. 

 

 

Bottom line, it's just...BAD business to tear down this roster even more because you had the 14th attendance in MLB as opposed to the 10th highest. 

It really should be. Again, anything we LOST in attendance, we're more than making up for with the increased revenue sharing. That coupled with the fact that THIS is the year the front office's believe this year is their chance to win a World Series, I'd be shocked if they cut payroll just for the sake of cutting payroll.

There's no justification for the payroll being below 130M this year...unless they simply manage to acquire young, controllable players via trade, the only other reasons I can come up with would be Attanasio's investment in Norwich(a theory I've never bought) or the idea that this team is servicing debt or they need to spend money on the stadium(also seems rather unlikely that they'd be slashing payroll and pissing off fans to pay for stadium renovations that are still years away when they have Burnes/Woodruff atop their rotation). 

 

 

So AGAIN, I'll trust that this team has a plan to get BETTER. Not to just try and simply slash their payroll to the 110M range. If that's the end goal, then Attanasio and the organization is going to have some explaining to do. NO fan base spends more per capita to support their team(it's not really even that close). 

If you want that and you want the sagging attendance numbers to stay the same or simply stagnate in the mid 2's, cutting payroll would definitely be the way to go. 

 

I don't believe that's the type of owner Attanasio is and I really hope I'm proven right. 

I don’t know if you’re ignoring the obvious or simply failing to see it.

Renfroe is consistent at providing an .800 OPS as a hitter and is due 11+ million dollars in ‘23 before he is free to play for whomever he chooses. 

However, the Brewers have several young OFers including multiple former first round picks whom they believe are capable of approaching if not meeting an .800 OPS all of whom will cost less than 10% of Renfroe this year.

That inefficiency is the sole reason he was traded. He has no value to the Brewers given his expected salary, remaining team control and the current make up of Milwaukee’s major league ready prospects. 

[Thurston Fluff]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:31 PM, Eye Black said:

I think there is a chance the Brewers are going to be shifting gears towards a greater emphasis on contact and speed in 2023. With the new rule changes (shift restrictions, larger bases, and limit on pickoff moves) I think there’s a reasonable argument to be made that balls in play and speed on the base paths could be an exploitable advantage as baseball adjusts to these new rules tweaks.

Speed is an important element to the overall profiles of many of the Brewers younger players such as Garrett Mitchell, Sal Frelick, Esteury Ruiz, and Brice Turang. Even the outfielder they picked up today, 26-year old Blake Perkins, reportedly has 60 grade speed according to scouting reports. The Brewers were tied for 10th overall in MLB in stolen bases per game last season. We’ll have to see how the remainder of the offseason plays out, but I think there’s a decent possibility the Brewers could be much more aggressive in putting pressure on opposing pitchers with their ability to run and steal. 

I'd add the speed and defense this team now has will prevent teams from doing just that to us. The lack of shifts and easier base stealing means defense just got a little more important.

[Harold Hutchison]

7 hours ago, Robocaller said:

Renfroe had 2.7 WAR last year. If the 3 receivers we got accumulate that in their careers, they'll be doing better than expected. 
I don't know why you listed Perkins as a full-time OF--if he is, we might as well tank for better draft picks.

 

As is they would play outfield all the time when they are in the lineup, as opposed to Turang and Wong, who are primarily infielders,

I don't think Perkins is any more than a platoon partner for Frelick/Mitchell against lefties.