Taylor, Houser to NYM

[Underachiever]

I picked a bad day to not log onto Brewerfan. Just caught up on all of this. I am not freaking out, but I sure felt like Houser was a good floor for the pitching staff. 5 innings, 3 ER is not bad. I think back to the discussions at the beginning of this season about what were were going to do with all the starters we had, and then we needed 33 starts from Rea and Teheran. I wouldn't give up starting pitching that is a known commodity at the ML level ever. Okay, maybe not ever, but you'd have to wow me. Oh well. Hope I am wrong. 

 

[Thurston Fluff]

We essentially traded 2024 depth for future depth so it's a wash there. I respected Taylor in that he managed to become a serviceable major league player despite not having a great minor league career. He made the most of his talent but I don't see him as someone who ages well. Hauser is more of a loss for 20204 IMHO. I liked the idea of stockpiling guys who can pitch multiple innings in relief or pitch 4-5 innings as a starter. As others have said, depth like is important. That said, we can still do that for less money. I think we can get guys like Hauser on minor league contracts with invites to camp and still retain the roster spots for bigger acquisitions.

As for the return from what I've read his stuff outside his fastball seems capable of getting major league hitters out. Being able to put his less that stellar fastball where he wants to set up his other stuff is going to be key. It appears he has the ability to do that so there is legit hope he can be a major league starter down the road.

 

[Brewers03]

20 hours ago, folly412 said:

Why not just non-tender Houser and Taylor?  Do we get kickbacks from Tommy John doctors for taking on their patients or something?

Because then you would have complained about getting nothing for the two

[CheeseheadInQC]

48 minutes ago, jay87shot said:

I posted similar trades earlier. 1/2 year of Ryan Yarbrough got the Dodgers 29th prospect and a 19 year old lotto prospect, Houser has a full year of contol and is similar quality pitchers. We gave up Avina and Sanchez for Bauers. Taylor is way more valuable than Bauers and I would argue Avina is a better prospect than Crow because he isn't out all year.

 

Yarbrough has an extra year of team control, so it is 1 1/2 years, which makes the returns seem more even. Also, the Bauers trade made no sense at the time or now, and I say that as someone who was lower than most on Avina. Maybe they can coax a random Jesus Aguilar type career year from Bauers, but for now it seems like a random bit of lunacy that isn’t a great point of comparison.

[Lucas]

This feels like a salary dump move. Brewers are a team that needs to win on the margins because we lack the star power of other playoff teams. Trading solid MLB players from the margins for someone who has no chance of impacting the MLB club in 2024 seems to speak towards a retool/rebuild season. 

Houser is a reliable back end SP/swing man. He's good to give you 100 innings a year with likely better than league average ERA-.  He was a bargain for his projected $5.5M in arb. 

Tyrone is a very good 4th OF. Consistent league average hitter, plus defense, good baserunning, elite PH. With 3 years of control left and only set to make about $500K over league minimum in 2024 he was also a bargain. 

We gave up a dependable 3 WAR in 2024 for around $7M in salary for a solid pitching prospect who just had TJ this year. That's poor value for a team that needs to win on the margins.

Underwhelming to say the least. Mark needs to let the FO follow through with this rebuild/retool year. Need to trade Burnes, Adames and even Williams potentially (though that could wait until the trade deadline). The current iteration of this roster is not a playoff team and we aren't going to suddenly start splurging in FA.

[Playing Catch]

1 hour ago, jay87shot said:

Avina is a better prospect than Crow

Admittedly, I was never a big Avina guy due to the swing and miss, and I really disliked the Bauers trade, but I have to believe that in a pool of 100 professional scouts, perhaps 3 or 4 would agree with this.

[Brewcrew82]

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/tinker-taylor-houser-crow/

Calls trade a "win win" for both teams. Interestingly, says it's around the best return the Brewers could have gotten for both players, but still mostly about a salary dump. Worth a quick read. 

[monty57]

21 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

You very clearly don't know what you're talking about. 

From the Collective Bargaining Agreement:

A player selected in the MLB portion of the Rule 5 Draft must spend the entire season on the active roster for the claiming team, and a minimum of 90 days to avoid the same restrictions the following season if needed to be placed on the injured list.

[TURBO]

33 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/tinker-taylor-houser-crow/

Calls trade a "win win" for both teams. Interestingly, says it's around the best return the Brewers could have gotten for both players. Worth a quick read. 

Ok, so you found an article that agrees with your thoughts on the situation. 

I wonder if there are any articles out there that thinks this trade was stupid? 

[Brewcrew82]

2 minutes ago, TURBO said:

Ok, so you found an article that agrees with your thoughts on the situation. 

I wonder if there are any articles out there that thinks this trade was stupid? 

I mean, it's Fangraphs....

You're free to dig up any articles you please. 

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

51 minutes ago, TURBO said:

Ok, so you found an article that agrees with your thoughts on the situation. 

I wonder if there are any articles out there that thinks this trade was stupid? 

Probably not. The trade is kind of a nothingburger. Two bottom-of-the-roster types for an injured, marginal prospect. About as BLAH of a deal as you're gonna get. Definitely not moving any needles in any significant direction.

[OldHeidelberg]

Count me as another a disgruntled small market team fan who will never be happy to call a trade a win just because we unloaded salary. I don't care much about Taylor but Houser is a useful pitcher, we are worse with him gone in 24. Especially if Burnes is traded.  

[Outlander]

A day later and would have liked if the Brewers would have received a bit more. If they like Rea more than Houser, fine, but still would think Houser was worth more when other starters are getting so much in free agency. Would be interesting to see if they were shopping Houser all off season and just didn't find other takers. If they end up spending this money elsewhere then have to take that into consideration but I am skeptical their team salary will meet or exceed the 2023 amount.

[CheeseheadInQC]

8 minutes ago, Outlander said:

A day later and would have liked if the Brewers would have received a bit more. If they like Rea more than Houser, fine, but still would think Houser was worth more when other starters are getting so much in free agency. Would be interesting to see if they were shopping Houser all off season and just didn't find other takers. If they end up spending this money elsewhere then have to take that into consideration but I am skeptical their team salary will meet or exceed the 2023 amount.

I would guess the shopping commenced after Miley and Ross signed. Personally I’d have held on to him until further along in spring training. On paper, Houser is a bit superfluous, but between Miley, Ross and Ashby, there is a lot of injury risk in their starting pitching depth chart.

[OldHeidelberg]

So the Carlos Gomez/Mike Fiers trade tree now stands at Contreras, Payamps, Gasser, and Crow? Am I missing anyone? I guess Crow is debatable since Taylor was included.

[CheeseheadInQC]

1 minute ago, OldHeidelberg said:

So the Carlos Gomez/Mike Fiers trade tree now stands at Contreras, Payamps, Gasser, and Crow? Am I missing anyone? I guess Crow is debatable since Taylor was included.

Justin Yeager I believe is still in the minors.

[Thurston Fluff]

4 hours ago, Underachiever said:

I picked a bad day to not log onto Brewerfan.

 

[torts]

Mets are going all in!!!!!!  World series here they come!!!!

[JosephC]

I really don't follow things like I used to, but just looking at the WAR values and figuring surplus value, I think the Mets got themselves a pretty good bargain on Taylor.

Not going to go into a full breakdown of the math, but Houser would have very little value IMO.  He only has one year of control left, and over the last 3 season he's been an average 1.0 bWAR/fWAR player per season.  I'd only put his surplus value at +0.7 million, and I value what I term fringe prospects (Crow fits here) at +2.2 million.

On the other hand, Taylor has 3 years of team control remaining and over the last three years has averaged 1.4 bWAR/fWAR per season.  Next year will be his age 30 season, but even if you start subtracting WAR for 2025 and 2026, I'd feel pretty safe that his value is about 14.4 million over the next three years.  With a projected arbitration salary of 1.7 million next year, if he stays on the same trajectory, he's probably only makes 8.4 million over that timeframe, and that might be a stretch.  So that's +6.0 million in surplus value...pretty good deal for the Mets to give up a fringe prospect and get 3 years of a 1.4 WAR player who carries a very low salary for his experience level.

[JohnBriggs12]

19 hours ago, Thurston Fluff said:

We essentially traded 2024 depth for future depth so it's a wash there. I respected Taylor in that he managed to become a serviceable major league player despite not having a great minor league career. He made the most of his talent but I don't see him as someone who ages well. Hauser is more of a loss for 20204 IMHO. I liked the idea of stockpiling guys who can pitch multiple innings in relief or pitch 4-5 innings as a starter. As others have said, depth like is important. That said, we can still do that for less money. I think we can get guys like Hauser on minor league contracts with invites to camp and still retain the roster spots for bigger acquisitions.

As for the return from what I've read his stuff outside his fastball seems capable of getting major league hitters out. Being able to put his less that stellar fastball where he wants to set up his other stuff is going to be key. It appears he has the ability to do that so there is legit hope he can be a major league starter down the road.

 

So you see Taylor as someone who won't age well?  Yet you don't back that up with anything.  He's coming off the best 2 month stretch of his career at age 29 so what makes you think he'll fall off a cliff at age 30?  Taylor's value in 2024 was the perfect place holder starting in RF and taking pressure off the younger outfielders all of whom have multiple options remaining.  He's a better hitter right now than any of Mitchell, Frelick, and Wiemer.  Certainly he has more power than Mitchell and Frelick and his bat sent Wiemer to the bench last year.  Hopefully all those guys progress in 2024 but that's a hope not a given.  Defensively, Taylor may not be as spectacular as those three but he's certainly dependable and versatile, never having made an error in 300 major league games in the outfield and he's a tremendous instinctive base runner.

Looking at the Mets roster, I think Taylor would be an improvement over 34 year old Starling Marte in RF and he's going to get plenty of time in CF and LF too.  I expect he'll easily get 450 or so AB's.  If he hits like he did in August and September of 23, Arnold is going to look foolish.   

[Outlander]

I do think there would have been playing time for Taylor, especially with the injury history of Frelick/Mitchell and the way Wiemer struggled and the necessity for more time in AAA. With such a minimal cost would have liked to have seen if Taylor could continue his second half success. Agree with Briggs that Taylor will the opportunity with the Mets so is a good spot for him, with the Mets potentially getting a productive, cost controlled outfielder for a couple of years.

[mtsportsfan]

16 hours ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Count me as another a disgruntled small market team fan who will never be happy to call a trade a win just because we unloaded salary. I don't care much about Taylor but Houser is a useful pitcher, we are worse with him gone in 24. Especially if Burnes is traded.  

I feel exactly the same way ! Taylor didn't have a spot on our roster , as much as watching Houser could frustrate me , he still was a decent pitcher on the back end of the rotation. Who knows maybe the guy we got will be lights out , unfortunately we won't know until 25

[monty57]

30 minutes ago, JohnBriggs12 said:

So you see Taylor as someone who won't age well?  Yet you don't back that up with anything.  He's coming off the best 2 month stretch of his career at age 29 so what makes you think he'll fall off a cliff at age 30?  Taylor's value in 2024 was the perfect place holder starting in RF and taking pressure off the younger outfielders all of whom have multiple options remaining.  He's a better hitter right now than any of Mitchell, Frelick, and Wiemer.  Certainly he has more power than Mitchell and Frelick and his bat sent Wiemer to the bench last year.  Hopefully all those guys progress in 2024 but that's a hope not a given.  Defensively, Taylor may not be as spectacular as those three but he's certainly dependable and versatile, never having made an error in 300 major league games in the outfield and he's a tremendous instinctive base runner.

Looking at the Mets roster, I think Taylor would be an improvement over 34 year old Starling Marte in RF and he's going to get plenty of time in CF and LF too.  I expect he'll easily get 450 or so AB's.  If he hits like he did in August and September of 23, Arnold is going to look foolish.   

I've got nothing against Taylor, but you know that you can't take a small sample and expect that to be the norm for the player going forward. 

Taylor has some power, and when he's hitting homers he's valuable to have in the lineup. However, he doesn't get on base enough to be a regular in most MLB lineups. If he could maintain his power while getting on base about .040-.050 higher than he does, then he could be a very valuable player. I don't think he'll make that change at this stage of his career.

He's been a nice player in his role with the Brewers over the years. There is a logjam in the OF, and the Brewers obviously thought that trading him for what they got was a better direction than getting a better return by trading one of the younger guys.

[monty57]

On 12/21/2023 at 7:49 AM, jay87shot said:

I think the problem is that those of you for this trade are not seeing the economics of the deal. We should have been able to get a better return for just one of those guys. I am in agreement that I would rather have Gasser get a rotation spot over Houser and have more OF ab's for our young bats. However we should have done better, the 7 million we save is not going to get us anything of notable value that is better than Houser. The 2 40 man spots are meaningless because we could easily release Baukausas and Vinny Capra to get those spots.

To this point our mlb roster, offesnse and pitching has gotten worse than last year. On top of that our farm system has also taken a hit. I have faith Arnold will make some good moves and signings but I am worried with the direction of our offseason.

Regarding the bolded portion, it wasn't just 40-man spots we cleared, we also cleared two 26-man spots. That would seem to mean that the Brewers are looking at adding a couple of players to the MLB team. Dropping guys at the bottom of the 40 man roster doesn't solve this.

If we make some trades or signings that bring in talent that the team wants on the MLB roster, then without this trade you have a roster crunch. Taylor and Hauser were obviously the odd men out. I don't want to disparage two guys who have helped the Brewers out over the recent past, but it doesn't seem that Taylor and Hauser had as much trade value as some here think they did, especially if the Brewers get themselves into a roster crunch and other teams think they can just wait it out and pick up the guys for free when the Brewers release them.

I'm with you that it seems the return is a little light, but I have to assume that Arnold made some calls and there wasn't a big market for these guys. Saving some money, getting the roster spots opened up, and getting back a guy who seems to project to be a regular in the MLB rotation from 2025-2031 isn't the worst result we could've had. The guy(s) they brought back had to be off the 40 man, so we weren't bringing in a major leaguer. We needed some pitching to go along with the young position players we have for the next half-decade, and Crow adds that.

But let's remember that this isn't the big move. This opens up spots and frees up some cash for the moves that will fill those vacated roster spots. That's what we should be excited about.

[DR28]

4 hours ago, monty57 said:

Regarding the bolded portion, it wasn't just 40-man spots we cleared, we also cleared two 26-man spots. That would seem to mean that the Brewers are looking at adding a couple of players to the MLB team. Dropping guys at the bottom of the 40 man roster doesn't solve this.

If we make some trades or signings that bring in talent that the team wants on the MLB roster, then without this trade you have a roster crunch. Taylor and Hauser were obviously the odd men out. I don't want to disparage two guys who have helped the Brewers out over the recent past, but it doesn't seem that Taylor and Hauser had as much trade value as some here think they did, especially if the Brewers get themselves into a roster crunch and other teams think they can just wait it out and pick up the guys for free when the Brewers release them.

I'm with you that it seems the return is a little light, but I have to assume that Arnold made some calls and there wasn't a big market for these guys. Saving some money, getting the roster spots opened up, and getting back a guy who seems to project to be a regular in the MLB rotation from 2025-2031 isn't the worst result we could've had. The guy(s) they brought back had to be off the 40 man, so we weren't bringing in a major leaguer. We needed some pitching to go along with the young position players we have for the next half-decade, and Crow adds that.

But let's remember that this isn't the big move. This opens up spots and frees up some cash for the moves that will fill those vacated roster spots. That's what we should be excited about.

Just hope this big move is a needle mover.... Trading those two and then signing Santana, doesnt make any sense... We could sign Santana with Houser and Taylor still on the roster.