Brewers and Chourio: Heyman reports 8 years, $80 million + 2 club option years

[monty57]

11 minutes ago, DR28 said:

If this deal gets done.... I don't see us trading Burnes then.

We'll go out with Chourio, Contreras, Yelich lead offense and hope top of rotation with Burnes and Peralta along with nasty bullpen is enough to win the Central and do some damage in October.

I still think Burnes is traded. Locking up Chourio is a long-term commitment, so the only effect it should have on this year is that he will probably be on the opening day roster instead of sitting in AAA for service time reasons. 

Chourio is a big part of the reason the team could be competitive for the next decade. Trading Burnes should bring back more pieces that will help over that time frame. I think we'll get a good MLB-ready prospect, and a few guys who will still spend some time in the minors. It will also free up some cash the will hopefully be used to shore up some positions of need.

[brewcrewdue80]

Team control equals 6.120-6.130 years.  8 years adds 1.040 days over  roughly control.  I hope a deal at minimum is 9years. Whether guaranteed or a team option year that's going to be a virtual lock.  8years is a loss imo on Brewers end.

 

 

Edit add re Burnes-  trading Burnes comes down to, "Do the 2 sides hash out a 1yr deal? or do they take the case to Arbitration?"   1st- trade value is completely set. 2nd- it's in limbo and a team would need to overpay on the low end offer to get the deal done. Crew would be bad to take an offer based on the high end Burnes side of a deal.  2nd part takes us to late March? Early April to set his value?  Trades for Burnes just won't go down then with rosters practically set in stone.

[tmwiese55]

Of course there's a risk in this, that's what makes it possible at all.  He risks losing a bunch of money if he's a legit star. We risk paying too much if he flops. Its a risk on both sides.

To me, we can't sit back and look at the Braves thinking 'man they are smart for locking in those contracts so young, geniuses, they're one of the smartest organizations' and then not try to do it ourselves when the opportunity presents itself.   

Based on the luck of the Brewers (and whatever our hitting coaches do to these guys), sure when we do it he'll probably flop but that's just the pessimism creeping in.  Assuming this isn't some Tatis level money and is in the ballpark of the numbers folks have thrown around in here I think you have to do it.

[monty57]

4 minutes ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

Team control equals 6.120-6.130 years.  8 years adds 1.040 days over  roughly control.  I hope a deal at minimum is 9years. Whether guaranteed or a team option year that's going to be a virtual lock.  8years is a loss imo on Brewers end.

Well, it should give them a discount on those years, and it gives them cost certainty. The discount is as big of a reason to do the deal as getting extra years of service time. I'm all for buying out some free agent years, but even a deal that only covered the years they already have him would have value as long as there's a discount.

For example, someone earlier posted that Soto will cost something like $80M for his "control" years. If they could sign Chourio to a $70M deal that only covers his "control" years, that would have value... presumably $10M worth, but that would depend on how he performs and how the market inflates over the next half-decade. The way "sports inflation" is going, what we'd pay him in his arby years under any contract he signs now will probably look cheap compared to what he'd get if we don't sign him and he plays up to expectation.

As to "certainty," the World Series is in October and arbitration hearings aren't until mid-February. It's hard to know how much you have to spend in free agency if you don't know what your own guys cost. If you had everyone under contract (no arby guys), you'd know exactly how much you had to spend from day one of free agency, so you could get a jump on things. This is far from the biggest reason for doing the deal, but it is a benefit.

[Thurston Fluff]

Seems to me the most risk is up front. He'd have to be below average not to be worth $10 million a year. The chances of that happening looks to be early in his career as opposed to later on.  We've got a lot of prearby players keeping the payroll down so we can absorb the contract early on and reap the rewards later when he hits his prime. The risk is if he only ever becomes Jason Heyward and he's only ever worth $10 million a year.

[DR28]

33 minutes ago, StearnsFTW said:

I hope you're wrong.  Trading Burnes is priority #1 for me.

Agreed, I hope I'm wrong as well.

[wiguy94]

27 minutes ago, tmwiese55 said:

Of course there's a risk in this, that's what makes it possible at all.  He risks losing a bunch of money if he's a legit star. We risk paying too much if he flops. Its a risk on both sides.

If it's only an 8 year deal it's really not that big of a risk from Chourio. He would still be hitting FA at 28 and would only be losing one year of FA money because with no deal the Brewers would service time manipulate him to get basically 7 years of service time.

[Outlander]

I really don't think you can make a conclusion on Burnes if a Chourio extension is done, could really go either way. Often times playing the young guys is a sign of a rebuild but not necessarily the case here.

[MrTPlush]

I mean, realistically, there is basically no risk for Chourio. He could lock in a 10 year deal assure himself $100mil+. I would guess that pretty much allows any level of life you care to live in Venezuela. If he 'leaves money on the table' in the end, I doubt he is going to shed many tears as he inks a FA deal over $300mil a decade from now. 

If you were good enough to get offered this much money before a single MLB at-bat. you would have to be a complete idiot to not accept. 

 

[brewcrewdue80]

7 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

I mean, realistically, there is basically no risk for Chourio. He could lock in a 10 year deal assure himself $100mil+. I would guess that pretty much allows any level of life you care to live in Venezuela. If he 'leaves money on the table' in the end, I doubt he is going to shed many tears as he inks a FA deal over $300mil a decade from now. 

If you were good enough to get offered this much money before a single MLB at-bat. you would have to be a complete idiot to not accept. 

 

Right and what's his marketability going to bring him if he's a MLB face like Azuna and Trout?  Who will be his first ad in WI? 

[CheezWizHed]

4 minutes ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

Right and what's his marketability going to bring him if he's a MLB face like Azuna and Trout?  Who will be his first ad in WI? 

One call and that's all.

Need a Kwik Trip from Venezuela?

Usingers... you want him at his Chourio-best, not his Chourio-wurst!

[monty57]

22 hours ago, DR28 said:

Wow!!!!!!!!!! Jackson our OD CF 2024?? If this happens, gotta imagine we're trading OF surplus for something.

I kind of skipped over this when I first read through, and I think it's a pretty valid point. If Chourio is signed to a deal, he is going to be our opening day CF, and is not going to spend any more time in the minors.

We need corner infielders and pitchers, and we have a excess OF. I don't think Yelich is tradeable, but even if he is moved to 1B or relegated to DH, it would still seem that one or two of Taylor, Weimer, Frelick or Mitchell could be traded this offseason. If it's Frelick or Mitchell, we'd better get a lot back in return.

It's not definite, as Weimer could start the year in AAA, but it's a definite possibility, and could help us shore up a hole elsewhere in the roster.

[CheezWizHed]

41 minutes ago, Outlander said:

I really don't think you can make a conclusion on Burnes if a Chourio extension is done, could really go either way. Often times playing the young guys is a sign of a rebuild but not necessarily the case here.

Yeah, I tend to think the opposite is true.  It isn't an automatic that Chourio is ready for MLB ball yet.  The deal will pretty much force their hand (probably) to have him in Milwaukee.  Without the deal, he most likely starts at AAA and plays his way to MLB - like Frelick and others have done in the past. 

I think Chourio will play well next year for us, but I'm not sure he will carry our offense.

[CheezWizHed]

2 minutes ago, monty57 said:

I kind of skipped over this when I first read through, and I think it's a pretty valid point. If Chourio is signed to a deal, he is going to be our opening day CF, and is not going to spend any more time in the minors.

We need corner infielders and pitchers, and we have a excess OF. I don't think Yelich is tradeable, but even if he is moved to 1B or relegated to DH, it would still seem that one or two of Taylor, Weimer, Frelick or Mitchell could be traded this offseason. If it's Frelick or Mitchell, we'd better get a lot back in return.

It's not definite, as Weimer could start the year in AAA, but it's a definite possibility, and could help us shore up a hole elsewhere in the roster.

I had responded to this earlier... Yelich at DH makes sense given his back issues.  Wiemer to AAA as he needs work on his swing. Then Frelick, Chourio, Mitchell, and TT for the OF.  I don't think Chourio forces our hand here.

But as you said, some might be trade bait too... I think Mitchell and TT are the most tradeable.  I really don't want to get rid of Frelick.  And I think we'd be trading Wiemer on a low note. 

[MrTPlush]

8 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

Usingers... you want him at his Chourio-best, not his Chourio-wurst!

They need to acquire Rizzo for 1B. I mean...imagine a 1-2 punch of Chourizzo. The ultimate middle of the lineup sausage.

[monty57]

3 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

I had responded to this earlier... Yelich at DH makes sense given his back issues.  Wiemer to AAA as he needs work on his swing. Then Frelick, Chourio, Mitchell, and TT for the OF.  I don't think Chourio forces our hand here.

But as you said, some might be trade bait too... I think Mitchell and TT are the most tradeable.  I really don't want to get rid of Frelick.  And I think we'd be trading Wiemer on a low note. 

Agree, although it has seemed that the Brewers are higher on Mitchell than Frelick. 

If one is traded, I hope it's Taylor. If it's Mitchell or Frelick, they'd better get a similar value/control player back at a different position, but what's the likelihood of that lining up?

[tmwiese55]

Yea I don't think it means a trade needs to happen.   First, none of the young guys are proven hitters at MLB yet, though a couple have shown good signs. Plus they can all be optioned. Also, as we saw last year people will get injured.    Besides that, Weimer was so bad at hitting last year that he should not be penciled in at MLB. He should have to start at AAA unless he just tears the cover off the ball in spring. Remember he was really only up last year due to injury.   

And if really needed Taylor is the easiest one to trade as he's running out of control and is paid more.  You keep all the young guys.   I'd prefer just keeping them all and seeing who pans out though.  And Taylor is a cheap stable average mlber right now so might as well keep around too. 

[AKCheesehead]

2 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

I had responded to this earlier... Yelich at DH makes sense given his back issues.  Wiemer to AAA as he needs work on his swing. Then Frelick, Chourio, Mitchell, and TT for the OF.  I don't think Chourio forces our hand here.

But as you said, some might be trade bait too... I think Mitchell and TT are the most tradeable.  I really don't want to get rid of Frelick.  And I think we'd be trading Wiemer on a low note. 

This is pretty much where I'm at.  Personally I don't see much benefit to trading from the OF depth because: 1) we're probably going to need the depth, 2) I think trading any of Mitchell, Frelick or Wiemer at this point would be selling quite low on a player with pretty substantial upside, and 3) I want TT on the team.  He's really solid at any OF position, can be decent with the bat, and I believe his stability brings more value to the Brewers than what they would receive for him in a trade.   I'd rather hold on to what we've got and during 2024 really figure out who to keep.  They've got the potential to have one of the greatest outfielder groups ever seen. 

[thebruce44]

2 hours ago, monty57 said:

That a perfectly fair take.

Every move a team or player makes has risks. For a small revenue team like the Brewers, I personally prefer the risk associated with signing early extensions to player who will sign them, as it gives the team the chance to get them at a discounted rate. Of course some will not work out, but I think their success will be better building their core around this strategy than it would be trying to build around free agency or extensions to players who are a year or so away from free agency.

Because of that, I'm excited to see this news (disclaimer that I don't know the numbers they're talking, and I may not be excited when I see them). I also hope that this leads some of the other good, young players to follow suit, and we can have a stable of good, young talent locked up for years to come.

I don't see those as the 2 options or ends of the spectrum for the Brewers. Its either sign early at a discount, or sell at 5 years and get picks to constantly be refreshing the talent pool and maintaining flexibility.

[jay87shot]

I feel like there would be multiple years that would have options so it would be more like 10 years of control. I could be Julio Rodriguez styled as well where there is like 8 years and then a 4 year option or something like that.

I feel like an extension with his strong play in Winter League make it more likely than not he could make the opening day roster. Coupled with the everyone is on the table report my guess is that a Yelich trade is possible. I doubt we pay Yelich 26mil to be a DH and the Bauer signing doesn't point towards Yeli at 1st.

[BrewerFan]

6 hours ago, SeaBass said:

You seem upset about something. I'm not sure what about because I didn't read this but I see a lot of words and capital letters. For what it's worth I'm sorry I made you feel bad and I hope you're having a better day today.

It's always worthwhile to reply simply to say I didn't read what you wrote. 

 

Here's the long of the short of it. 

I don't care if "people were saying," they didn't want to trade Hiura for deGrom(who was getting paid a LOT and was due to be a FA at that time, so...again, obviously). I don't need a lesson in how much people liked Hiura. I've been to hundreds of Brewers games, I've been following this team for a minute. 

 

Hiura is NOTHING like Chourio. I'll just get back down to the basics and if you want to get back to the whole preamble with the "but people were really excited about Hiura," fine. Nobody wanted to give him a 100M dollar deal(I can speak in those terms as well). 

[mudbutt]

1 hour ago, wiguy94 said:

If it's only an 8 year deal it's really not that big of a risk from Chourio. He would still be hitting FA at 28 and would only be losing one year of FA money because with no deal the Brewers would service time manipulate him to get basically 7 years of service time.

He would be making significantly less than he would in arbitration as well if he is any good.

[wiguy94]

Just now, mudbutt said:

He would be making significantly less than he would in arbitration as well if he is any good as well.

I mean not really. He's sacrificing maybe $25M to guarantee himself around $80M where he still hits FA at 28.

[mudbutt]

That is significant amount?  And could be a lot more with rising salary and or if he is a real star.  Soto would lose 23 million on this year alone.  Also not arguing whether or not Chourio should do it.

[BrewerFan]

12 minutes ago, thebruce44 said:

I don't see those as the 2 options or ends of the spectrum for the Brewers. Its either sign early at a discount, or sell at 5 years and get picks to constantly be refreshing the talent pool and maintaining flexibility.

That's true. It's also terrible for a fan base. Imagine if the Packers couldn't afford to keep Rodgers? The Bucks Giannis?

You get a true superstar and you have to trade him before he's hitting his prime-prime years, that's not going to drive interest(just the opposite).

I remember when the Brewers lost Molitor. It was a totally different set of circumstances, but it was brutal as a...~6-year-old fan(It was after '91, but I'd been watching him for a few years by then).

Similar to losing Prince and we all knew that was coming(and VERY few people were advocating for an extension with him).