What the Juan Soto, Eduardo Rodríguez, and Jeimer Candelario Deals Mean for the Brewers

[Matthew Trueblood]

Although the impending Shohei Ohtani decision is still keeping the floodgates from flying open, there was a flurry of activity Wednesday. The implications of them could be significant, as the Brewers try to bring greater definition to their offseason plan.

Image courtesy of © Orlando Ramirez-USA TODAY Sports

There were three key moves Wednesday, as the Winter Meetings wound down in Nashville. First, and in a protracted way over the course of the entire day, the Yankees acquired Juan Soto from the Padres. It was a seven-player move, involving not only Soto but old friend Trent Grisham. Then, late in the night, a quick one-two punch added some new gas to the hot stove. Eduardo Rodriguez signed a four-year deal with the Diamondbacks, with an option for the fifth year that could stretch the value of the pact to $100 million. Shortly afterward, Jeimer Candelario agreed to a three-year, $45-million contract with the Reds.

Each of these moves has an important set of ramifications for the Brewers, whose offseason has yet to take any irreversible shape. Let's tackle each separately, and discuss why they matter in Milwaukee.

Soto Haul Sets the Market on Corbin Burnes
The Padres got five young players in return for Soto and Grisham. The twin headliners, though, are swingman Michael King (two years from free agency, and slated to start for the Padres in 2024) and fellow hurler Drew Thorpe, a second-round pick by the Yankees in 2022 who is already considered a top-100 prospect by MLB Pipeline. Beyond them, the package also includes big-league reliever Jhony Brito and undersized but polished pitching prospect Randy Vasquez, and fringy catcher Kyle Higashioka.

That collection of talent won't transform the Padres overnight, but it's substantial. Since Soto is an exceptional talent who was available as a one-year trade rental, though, the big question is whether it indicates a sufficiently seller-friendly market to make trading Corbin Burnes advisable. The signals as to whether or not the Crew will trade Burnes are hopelessly mixed, so we can best spend our time trying to suss out whether they should.

If this were all Matt Arnold could expect to get for Burnes (and especially for, say, Burnes and Tyrone Taylor, a rough equivalent for the throw-in of Grisham), it would feel a bit light. There's still plenty of meat on the bone, and a pitcher like King, especially, could be a great fit for a contending Brewers team in both 2024 and 2025. Still, it feels like less than it would be worth to give up Burnes, who could anchor the Milwaukee rotation on another run to the postseason before he hits free agency next winter. Remember, too, that (thanks to their status as revenue-sharing recipients) the Brewers would get a better draft pick if and when Burnes departs than other, richer teams would.

We have to consider the circumstances, though. Soto, by virtue of his position and his projected salary, had a narrower market than Burnes would have, and the Padres needed to get rid of him worse than the Brewers need to offload Burnes. Indeed, whereas that need was pretty acute for San Diego, the Brewers face no actual imperative to move Burnes. Their leverage is greater, and supply and demand work in their favor more. I still think they would get materially more than this for him, and thus, that trading him is probably the wisest course. We'll see whether or not that proves to be true, but Tim Muma wrote sagaciously about the approach they ought to take earlier this week.

Rodríguez Off the Board
Given what the Brewers have already intimated about their payroll plans for 2024, signing Wade Miley earlier this week felt like the finalization of their starting rotation additions. Still, it was interesting to see Rodríguez sign with the defending NL pennant winners, for multiple reasons. I had him as the fifth-best, fifth-most impactful free-agent fit for the Brewers earlier this winter, but now that he ended up signing for $80 million in guarantees, that feels hopelessly unrealistic in hindsight.

On the other hand, the pitching market continues to show its haleness and vigor. After opting out of three years and $49 million, this much larger payday is a sign that Rodríguez had a robust market. It runs a bit higher than I would have projected for him, and only underscores the value Burnes (no messy long-term commitment, no more than $16 million in salary for one year) would have as an alternative to swimming in those waters, for any team.

Reds Bloat Infield but Bolster Lineup with Candelario
No team should make its offseason decisions based mostly on their rivals', but moves that affect projections of the standings and the fight for the NL Central title in 2024 have to be baked into the front office's strategy. Over the last week or two, the Reds have announced an earnest intention to build on their 82-win showing in 2023, so the Brewers are going to need to get better, too, if they intend to withstand that challenge.

The latest volley in that skirmish was Cincinnati's late-night agreement with Candelario, who figures to lengthen their lineup but also poses a dilemma for them. With Spencer Steer, Christian Encarnacion-Strand, Elly De La Cruz, Matt McLain, Noelvi Marte, and Jonathan India, the team's infield was overcrowded even before Candelario was stirred into the slurry. They'll move Steer to left field, with this move, but they still have a surplus. That's the threatening thing: this is a first move. There's a second in the offing, if the Reds front office can finish it. They intend to deal from this depth to shore up their starting rotation.

That's in addition to the moves the team has already made, bringing in hurlers Nick Martinez and Emilio Pagan on two-year deals with opt-outs after 2024. Nor are the Reds the only ones making waves. The Cardinals' winter, so far, has been a bit confused and unintimidating, but there's no question of their eagerness to rebound after the disaster that was their 2023. The Cubs haven't yet done anything notable, but obviously, they remain in the mix on many things.

In a certain way, these moves leave Matt Arnold with mixed signals about how to proceed. If he trades Burnes, that would seem to be an acknowledgment of a willingness to at least back off from putting his shoulder into winning in 2024. Yet, it's clear that no one in the organization has an appetite for rebuilding right now, and unless a Burnes trade brought back immediate and significant help, it would start to get hard to see how the team can maintain its place atop the Central while the others vying for it make big, win-now maneuvers.

On balance, especially in the wake of the Jackson Chourio extension, I think the team still ought to try to thread that needle. They could get enough for Burnes not to step back much, and the starting pitching pool in free agency remains pretty deep. Committing to Chourio makes one or more of the team's young outfielders expendable, and they might be able to go shopping on the trade market for a big bat, like the White Sox's Eloy Jimenez. They could, in essence, sell, then buy, all in one winter, and they still have every opportunity to head into 2024 as favorites in the Central.

What are your reactions to these good-sized moves? How do they tinge your opinions on the Brewers' winter plans?

View full article

[Michael Trzinski]

For one, they take a couple key players off the market, and secondly, helps to set the market value for Burnes.

Last year, Rodriguez and Burnes had similar numbers (ERA+, FIP, WHIP, K:BB ratio, K/9) but in their careers, Burnes has been better.

Burnes is about 1 1/2 years younger. If 'E-Rod' is worth 4/$80m, Burnes is worth at least 4/$100m if not more. Will the Brewers sign him for that? Who knows, but some ML team will be willing to plunk some cash down and make the right deal for the righty.

[Profbratsch]

The Brewers have had a history of selling low, and one does not have to go very far back to see that. For example, if Josh Hader had been traded even one year earlier the return would have, IMO, been far greater than what actually transpired.

This is the time to capitalize on an opportunity, and the Yankees have proven that a team will go all in, even if the player it seeks is currently a one-year rental.

[BrewerFan]

7 hours ago, Profbratsch said:

The Brewers have had a history of selling low, and one does not have to go very far back to see that. For example, if Josh Hader had been traded even one year earlier the return would have, IMO, been far greater than what actually transpired.

This is the time to capitalize on an opportunity, and the Yankees have proven that a team will go all in, even if the player it seeks is currently a one-year rental.

??? And if they'd have Sold Burnes after his Cy Young year, they'd have gotten MUCH more for him with 4 years remaining than they'll get with 1 year remaining. They ended up getting a pretty good deal for Hader.

If THAT is your metric for "selling low," then I think every small market team sells low. You're completely discounting the value of having that player on your team for a playoff run when evaluating "value." And Hader's value was ALWAYS exaggerated by most. The Aroldis Chapman trade was regularly used as a comp despite the fact it was a clear outlier.

8 hours ago, Michael Trzinski said:

Burnes is about 1 1/2 years younger. If 'E-Rod' is worth 4/$80m, Burnes is worth at least 4/$100m if not more. Will the Brewers sign him for that? Who knows, but some ML team will be willing to plunk some cash down and make the right deal for the righty.

I would almost guarantee if the Brewers could sign Burnes for 4/100M, they'd do it. 

He's likely to get 6-7 years and a WHOLE lot more in AAV. I think in order to sign him right now, you'd have to pay FA prices and that'd be more like 7/240.

 

I don't think either of these deals have much impact on the Brewers. The Reds move makes very little sense given the state of their farm system and as noted, the Soto deal was made by a team that was so far out over their skis in terms of payroll, they needed a loan. I'm curious how many teams were even in on the LFer at 33M a year while there was another LHed hitter available that all the big market teams are chasing.

The number will inevitably be fewer than teams who are in on an ace for well less than half that price. 

[Michael Trzinski]

1 hour ago, BrewerFan said:

He's likely to get 6-7 years and a WHOLE lot more in AAV. I think in order to sign him right now, you'd have to pay FA prices and that'd be more like 7/240.

That is the problem with baseball in the free agency era (since the mid-70s). EVERYBODY overpays for players, especially pitchers. Seven years for a pitcher? Are the teams on crack? And owners wonder why their teams are always struggling to pay the bills...

[BrewerFan]

21 minutes ago, Michael Trzinski said:

That is the problem with baseball in the free agency era (since the mid-70s). EVERYBODY overpays for players, especially pitchers. Seven years for a pitcher? Are the teams on crack? And owners wonder why their teams are always struggling to pay the bills...

Ok...you can say they're overpaying, but that's still the market.

I don't really know which teams are "struggling to pay the bills," other than the Pads who had an owner who was terminally ill and may have spent recklessly because he really wanted to see his team win.

Most teams are doing just fine. They set a budget, they don't need loans to meet payroll...they're just fine.

And those big market teams know they're going to eat a couple of bad years...and they'll probably get some good years on the first half of the deal. The Yanks don't seem to be regretting the Cole deal at this point(and there's a decent chance he opts out next year with 4/144M remaining).

But whatever you think about it...it's not a market the Brewers can reasonably get in which is why they should move on from Burnes now.

[Michael Trzinski]

1 hour ago, BrewerFan said:

Ok...you can say they're overpaying, but that's still the market.

I don't really know which teams are "struggling to pay the bills," other than the Pads who had an owner who was terminally ill and may have spent recklessly because he really wanted to see his team win.

Most teams are doing just fine. They set a budget, they don't need loans to meet payroll...they're just fine.

And those big market teams know they're going to eat a couple of bad years...and they'll probably get some good years on the first half of the deal. The Yanks don't seem to be regretting the Cole deal at this point(and there's a decent chance he opts out next year with 4/144M remaining).

But whatever you think about it...it's not a market the Brewers can reasonably get in which is why they should move on from Burnes now.

Overpaying or 'still the market,' it's still spending like drunken sailors on a weekend pass in Bangkok.

Maybe 'unhappy with the balance sheet' is a better phrase than 'struggling to pay the bills.' 

But I'm sure you see my point... 

[Profbratsch]

10 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Ok...you can say they're overpaying, but that's still the market.

I don't really know which teams are "struggling to pay the bills," other than the Pads who had an owner who was terminally ill and may have spent recklessly because he really wanted to see his team win.

Most teams are doing just fine. They set a budget, they don't need loans to meet payroll...they're just fine.

And those big market teams know they're going to eat a couple of bad years...and they'll probably get some good years on the first half of the deal. The Yanks don't seem to be regretting the Cole deal at this point(and there's a decent chance he opts out next year with 4/144M remaining).

But whatever you think about it...it's not a market the Brewers can reasonably get in which is why they should move on from Burnes now.

Seeing your last sentence-that's where I was going with Hader. He was approaching a point in his career where he would command too much for the team’s budget.