Brewers Acquire Bryan Hudson from Dodgers

[CheeseheadInQC]

The Brewers obviously know more about Chambers’ rehab than I do, but in principle I am opposed to dealing upside pitching for fringy relievers. It has bitten the Brewers too often in recent years.

[Frisbee Slider]

12 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

Ok, the guy we signed to a huge deal isn't producing at his normal levels, or what his contract would say he maybe should, he's still outproduced the previous options we had by a significant margin and that's lead to more wins etc".

Anthony Rendon looked alright on paper in 2019. He will make $38.5 million this year and be league average.

Manny Machado will out produce Monasterio in 2024. That doesn’t mean we should want to pay him $31 million until 2033.

 

[JefferyLeonard]

3 minutes ago, tmwiese55 said:

To play this year, sure I'd take those guys.  Thus why our management looks for short term deals though, because 3 years from now those guys are gonna be boat anchors to us. Maybe you should take the blinders off and look at these long term contracts and how they turn out.

Also, I know if you look up FA lists Matt Chapman is ranked highly. Have you actually looked at how mediocre of a hitter he is? I've had him in fantasy, he's not great and worth a megacontract.  Its basically putting someone like Adames at 3B, that's what he is if not worse.   I'm pretty confident Brewers have been trying for Hoskins when he was under the radar a bit and would be ok with giving him a good 2-4 year deal, but I'm doubting the rich teams haven't figured out that now and are going to give him more, which will most likely turn out horribly.

And no, when you have a limited budget adding contracts you want is not improving the team. It will end up killing them 2-3 years from now when the player is worse than a rookie you could bring up and he's eating up 30 mil per year.   It seems you forget there is more to to it than the one year in front of you right now.   To use the past example, if we had Moose/Grandalls contracts on our books the last 4 years we'd have had no chance, thus not improving the team

I live in the here and now, and don't worry about the future until it gets here. It's unpredictable. Worry about 2025 2026 etc when they come. I think that way with all the teams I follow. No one knows what could/will/may happen in 2025, 2026 etc. So why even think about it? I honestly think that's where a lot of sports teams fail. They worry about/count on the future to be "when they really take off". Okay so what if that never happens? Then all the years you wasted trying to "look towards the future", were also failures. When you have a window(even if it's theoretical), to me you should be going for it every single time you are in that situation for however long that window may be. No hesitancy, no thinking "well if we do this now how does it affect future years", worry about that then. That's the right approach IMO. Not just with the Brewers or any MLB team, but football and NBA as well. Each year should be looked at individually and be focused on that. Stop worrying about a future that may never end up the way you want/hope. 

[brewcrewdue80]

MEH. 6-8 extension as a lefty is intriguing.  But that always comes with control inefficiencies.  Bullpen guy who they can option throughput the season if he doesn't stick.  He did play on a 100+ win Dodgers team last season. Yet 92 win Brewers team he's upsetting?  Low hit and HR/9 totals is good. The BBs is what will hurt him. Good thing Brewers have a pitching lab, 2 options and can work with him before he gets to pitch another ML inning.  Just costs them a 40man spot.

 

Edit and of course the prospect.  Let's say one who is basically Crow that is further ahead than the prospect given up.

[sveumrules]

5 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

I live in the here and now, and don't worry about the future until it gets here. It's unpredictable. Worry about 2025 2026 etc when they come. I think that way with all the teams I follow. No one knows what could/will/may happen in 2025, 2026 etc. So why even think about it? I honestly think that's where a lot of sports teams fail. They worry about/count on the future to be "when they really take off". Okay so what if that never happens? Then all the years you wasted trying to "look towards the future", were also failures. When you have a window(even if it's theoretical), to me you should be going for it every single time you are in that situation for however long that window may be. No hesitancy, no thinking "well if we do this now how does it affect future years", worry about that then. That's the right approach IMO. Not just with the Brewers or any MLB team, but football and NBA as well. Each year should be looked at individually and be focused on that. Stop worrying about a future that may never end up the way you want/hope. 

Which sports franchises (or businesses in general) operate in this now only worry about the future later manner that you would like to see the Brewers emulate?

[Vgmastr]

6 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

I live in the here and now, and don't worry about the future until it gets here. It's unpredictable. Worry about 2025 2026 etc when they come. I think that way with all the teams I follow. No one knows what could/will/may happen in 2025, 2026 etc. So why even think about it? I honestly think that's where a lot of sports teams fail. They worry about/count on the future to be "when they really take off". Okay so what if that never happens? Then all the years you wasted trying to "look towards the future", were also failures. When you have a window(even if it's theoretical), to me you should be going for it every single time you are in that situation for however long that window may be. No hesitancy, no thinking "well if we do this now how does it affect future years", worry about that then. That's the right approach IMO. Not just with the Brewers or any MLB team, but football and NBA as well. Each year should be looked at individually and be focused on that. Stop worrying about a future that may never end up the way you want/hope. 

Next time just say "I have no earthly idea how baseball economics works."  It'll save you time.

[tmwiese55]

1 minute ago, JefferyLeonard said:

I live in the here and now, and don't worry about the future until it gets here. It's unpredictable. Worry about 2025 2026 etc when they come. I think that way with all the teams I follow. No one knows what could/will/may happen in 2025, 2026 etc. So why even think about it? I honestly think that's where a lot of sports teams fail. They worry about/count on the future to be "when they really take off". Okay so what if that never happens? Then all the years you wasted trying to "look towards the future", were also failures. When you have a window(even if it's theoretical), to me you should be going for it every single time you are in that situation for however long that window may be. No hesitancy, no thinking "well if we do this now how does it affect future years", worry about that then. That's the right approach IMO. Not just with the Brewers or any MLB team, but football and NBA as well. Each year should be looked at individually and be focused on that. Stop worrying about a future that may never end up the way you want/hope. 

Well, I'm very happy you're not running the team then because that is an absolutely horrible way to run a sports franchise (especially a cash strapped one like ours).   If you look around sports, including baseball, the approach you're pushing is consistently the least successful way.      The most basic example in baseball is look what Epstein did with Boston and Cubs that led to their titles, look at what set up Houston to be successful and how they've sustained (who have let Cole go, Greinke go, Springer go, and more).   Look at how the Angels have done the last chunk of years.  How that worked out for Detroit. How the Yankees have been doing. How have things turned out for Pads and Mets. The list goes on.   

Dodgers are the best run team in the league, they plan for the future and have unlimited money at the same time.  Meanwhile, they let Scherzer go, let Turner go, have refused handing out a terrible contract to Kershaw, let Seager go, let Bellinger go instead of giving him a dumb long term contract that would've hurt them

[Playing Catch]

According to this article from 2021, he was sitting 95-97 at one point...

Big Stuff Depth Arms
Trevor Megill, RHP
Dakota Chalmers, RHP
Bryan Hudson, LHP
Darius Valdez, RHP
Craig Brooks, RHP

Megill is a mid-90s/slider depth reliever. Chalmers has three plus pitches and 20 control. Valdez, acquired before the season from San Diego, will touch 102, but he’s in Mauricio Cabrera land. Hudson gained nearly 10 mph of fastball velo and went from sitting 87-90 to 95-97. He’s a 3 athlete without an impact secondary. Brooks’ fastball — 92-96 with plus spin — garnered an 18% swinging strike rate in 2019.

[RedStickBrew]

19 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

From May 1st through the end of the season, Matt Chapman hit 205/298/361 (84 wRC+) with a 29.8% K rate. That kind of offense wouldn't have helped the Brewers very much. His defensive metrics are also in decline over the last couple years compared to earlier in his career...+78 DRS and +48 OAA over his first 4,955 innings at 3B compared to +14 DRS and +5 OAA over his last 2,558 innings at 3B.

If he could be had for say something like 4/80, sure sign me up. If he comes in closer to the 5/120 predicted by FanGraphs or the 6/150 predicted by MLBTR, I think that would be a drastic overpay which would have the potential to limit the Brewers ability to spend during what will hopefully be Chourio's prime years.

Good to see @sveumrules back to work in the new year

[JefferyLeonard]

18 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

Which sports franchises (or businesses in general) operate in this now only worry about the future later manner that you would like to see the Brewers emulate?

I can give you two right off the top of my head...The 2021 Tampa bay Buccaneers and the 2022 LA Rams. Both teams made huge moves at the trade deadline, Made huge splashes in the offseason and didn't care or weren't worried about the future. They "went for it" and lo and behold..the most aggressive teams that year ending up with the trophy at the end of the year. Does that necessarily work in baseball? No, but you asked for examples of teams that didn't look towards the future. They didn't, and it paid off. Both teams had one down year in between, and both are right back to being in the playoffs and having a chance to win the trophy again. The Rams haven't had a first round pick in several years, or many draft picks to be exact. 

The Bucks are another example...they loaded up the year they won the title, and have ever since. They don't care if they have any draft picks in future years because they know the future means nothing if you don't capitalize on the "window(s)" you do have. They don't care what it costs, they are going to do whatever it takes to put them in the best position possible to win a title(s). 

I'm sure there are other examples, but those 3 come instantly to mind, and have all occurred in the last 3 years. Coincidence of a team(s) ignoring the future and it paying off? Once is an accident, twice is a mistake, three times is a trend. 

[JefferyLeonard]

25 minutes ago, tmwiese55 said:

Well, I'm very happy you're not running the team then because that is an absolutely horrible way to run a sports franchise (especially a cash strapped one like ours).   If you look around sports, including baseball, the approach you're pushing is consistently the least successful way.      The most basic example in baseball is look what Epstein did with Boston and Cubs that led to their titles, look at what set up Houston to be successful and how they've sustained (who have let Cole go, Greinke go, Springer go, and more).   Look at how the Angels have done the last chunk of years.  How that worked out for Detroit. How the Yankees have been doing. How have things turned out for Pads and Mets. The list goes on.   

Dodgers are the best run team in the league, they plan for the future and have unlimited money at the same time.  Meanwhile, they let Scherzer go, let Turner go, have refused handing out a terrible contract to Kershaw, let Seager go, let Bellinger go instead of giving him a dumb long term contract that would've hurt them

And just this offseason have signed Yamamoto and Ohtani. Are they really planning for the future or are they trying to win it all now? Whatever will be will be in the future, but constantly looking ahead to the future blinds you to the here and now and you could be missing a fantastic opportunity that's staring you in the face, but your constant focus on the future doesn't allow you to see it. 

[Thurston Fluff]

I'm assuming he has options remaining. If so, that's one thing our pen didn't have a lot of. The ones that do are not very likely to be sent down.

[tmwiese55]

10 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

And just this offseason have signed Yamamoto and Ohtani. Are they really planning for the future or are they trying to win it all now? Whatever will be will be in the future, but constantly looking ahead to the future blinds you to the here and now and you could be missing a fantastic opportunity that's staring you in the face, but your constant focus on the future doesn't allow you to see it. 

And you're missing that the shiny object you're attracted to doesn't allow you to see that its a horrible move that will hurt you down the line.  This has been the result over and over and over and over in baseball. Yet you're mad that we don't want to repeat it.

This is a deviation for LAD from what they've been doing. We'll see how it plays out.  But like I said, they have been the ones playing it correctly the whole time so I don't know how using them as an example is some kind of 'proving it' for you.  IMO, if Ohtani doesn't pitch more than 2-3 years that will be a bad contract.  that said, they did find a loophole/gap in the system to try to exploit. Kudos for figuring it out, like I said the're the best run team with unlimited money at the same time. Perhaps you should be a fan of theirs.

[JefferyLeonard]

1 minute ago, tmwiese55 said:

And you're missing that the shiny object you're attracted to doesn't allow you to see that its a horrible move that will hurt you down the line.  This has been the result over and over and over and over in baseball. Yet you're mad that we don't want to repeat it.

This is a deviation for LAD from what they've been doing. We'll see how it plays out.  But like I said, they have been the ones playing it correctly the whole time so I don't know how using them as an example is some kind of 'proving it' for you.  IMO, if Ohtani doesn't pitch more than 2-3 years that will be a bad contract.  that said, they did find a loophole/gap in the system to try to exploit. Kudos for figuring it out, like I said the're the best run team with unlimited money at the same time. Perhaps you should be a fan of theirs.

So your contention is that the Dodgers have been the one team that has been "doing it right" the whole time. That's interesting, because If that's the "right" way to do it, then they certainly should have multiple World series titles in that time span right? Well, they have won 1 WS title the whole time they have been the only team supposedly "doing it the right way the whole time". And it should be noted they won it in a covid shorted season. If that's "the right way to do it", then truly the "right way" is broken and I want no part of it.

So, your claiming if Ohtani only pitches 2-3 years it's a bad contract. What if...the Dodgers win the world series in 2 of those 3 years, or even all 3 years? Then is the contract still bad, or was it well worth it? Even if the later years make it a bad contract. Do you think they will really care? And in fact, they are another example of "going for it now" given that Ohtani's contract is severely back loaded. They understand and realize they have an opportunity and the "right way" wasn't necessarily working for them, so they are changing their strategy/philosophy. Is it guaranteed to work? Of course not, but at least after doing things "the right way" all those years and it not working, they changed their strategy and aren't being complacent and keep doing the same thing that wasn't working.

 

I am by no means a Dodger fan, not by any stretch, but I absolutely applaud their aggressiveness and being willing to be more focused on the here and now and worrying about the future when it comes. More of that in sports, please. 

[Frisbee Slider]

3 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

I absolutely applaud their aggressiveness and being willing to be more focused on the here and now and worrying about the future when it comes.

Thoughts on the Padres giving Machado, Bogarts and Tatis Jr nearly $1 billion?

[CheeseheadInQC]

27 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

I can give you two right off the top of my head...The 2021 Tampa bay Buccaneers and the 2022 LA Rams. Both teams made huge moves at the trade deadline, Made huge splashes in the offseason and didn't care or weren't worried about the future. They "went for it" and lo and behold..the most aggressive teams that year ending up with the trophy at the end of the year. Does that necessarily work in baseball? No, but you asked for examples of teams that didn't look towards the future. They didn't, and it paid off. Both teams had one down year in between, and both are right back to being in the playoffs and having a chance to win the trophy again. The Rams haven't had a first round pick in several years, or many draft picks to be exact. 

The Bucks are another example...they loaded up the year they won the title, and have ever since. They don't care if they have any draft picks in future years because they know the future means nothing if you don't capitalize on the "window(s)" you do have. They don't care what it costs, they are going to do whatever it takes to put them in the best position possible to win a title(s). 

I'm sure there are other examples, but those 3 come instantly to mind, and have all occurred in the last 3 years. Coincidence of a team(s) ignoring the future and it paying off? Once is an accident, twice is a mistake, three times is a trend. 

Did the Buccaneers really make any moves that impacted their future negatively? They signed a hall of fame quarterback to a short-term below market deal, I don’t think signed anyone of significance to long term money and the highest pick I think they traded was at the bottom of the fourth round. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 hours ago, sveumrules said:

What exactly is perplexing about this move?

The stockpiling of fringe relief arms and the fact the 40-man now sits at 39 with several holes that still need filling.

It's just a weird series of events. I'm sure more moves are coming but we're now into the new year and we still have no real idea where this offseason is going.

I'm not judging, I'm not complaining, it's just... weird. What matters is the roster the team fields on Opening Day but I'm scratching my head a little over how they're going to get there.

[Jim Goulart]

 

[tmwiese55]

23 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

So your contention is that the Dodgers have been the one team that has been "doing it right" the whole time. That's interesting, because If that's the "right" way to do it, then they certainly should have multiple World series titles in that time span right? Well, they have won 1 WS title the whole time they have been the only team supposedly "doing it the right way the whole time". And it should be noted they won it in a covid shorted season. If that's "the right way to do it", then truly the "right way" is broken and I want no part of it.

So, your claiming if Ohtani only pitches 2-3 years it's a bad contract. What if...the Dodgers win the world series in 2 of those 3 years, or even all 3 years? Then is the contract still bad, or was it well worth it? Even if the later years make it a bad contract. Do you think they will really care? And in fact, they are another example of "going for it now" given that Ohtani's contract is severely back loaded. They understand and realize they have an opportunity and the "right way" wasn't necessarily working for them, so they are changing their strategy/philosophy. Is it guaranteed to work? Of course not, but at least after doing things "the right way" all those years and it not working, they changed their strategy and aren't being complacent and keep doing the same thing that wasn't working.

 

I am by no means a Dodger fan, not by any stretch, but I absolutely applaud their aggressiveness and being willing to be more focused on the here and now and worrying about the future when it comes. More of that in sports, please. 

Well no I didn't say they were the only team. I said they were doing it best while also having the most money to spend.    Houston would be #2 and some could argue number 1 since they don't have unlimited money.

I also was just coming back to point out how was LAD able to do this this offseason?  They planned for it years in advance by not having bad contracts, basically by not chasing the shiny object every year approach you're advocating for here.  They had targeted Ohtani 2-3 years back and planned for this the whole time.  This is why they let all those guys go I listed, so they could get under the tax (I think they accomplished that for one year) and so they could afford this.  So, yes if they do get 2-3 titles out of this it was their responsibility/diligence to not go "all in" every year the last 3 years that allowed it.   If they had Machado contract, Seager contract, a terrible Kershaw contract, terrible Bellinger contract, etc they wouldn't have been able to do this.

And Yes, it would still be a bad contract unless he was the key in getting the Japanese pitcher too and he's awesome and key to winning.  If Ohtani hits well of course that's great, but they could've gotten that from someone else for cheaper which won't potentially cripple them down the line. Like if he doesn't really pitch again substantially they could've signed another top level hitter like him for half as much total money (say they would've gotten Harper instead, or Soto). But like I said, this is a great loophole they've found so its really tough to comment or give much opinion say how much that contract will hurt them so far down the line with inflation and who knows how the economics of baseball look down then. It is such an unknown.

[sveumrules]

16 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

So your contention is that the Dodgers have been the one team that has been "doing it right" the whole time. That's interesting, because If that's the "right" way to do it, then they certainly should have multiple World series titles in that time span right? Well, they have won 1 WS title the whole time they have been the only team supposedly "doing it the right way the whole time". And it should be noted they won it in a covid shorted season. If that's "the right way to do it", then truly the "right way" is broken and I want no part of it.

Since the Yankees went back to back in 1999-2000, 16 teams have won 23 different World Series.

The only teams with multiple WS wins over the last 23 years are Boston (one tainted), San Fran, St. Louis and Houston (one tainted).

The Dodgers have absolutely been the most dominant organization in MLB over the last eleven years with their 1031 - 650 record almost 100 wins better than the Yankees at 940 - 740.

They've only one WS win (and two WS losses) despite that dominance because the MLB postseason is largely random.

Being a World Series fetishist for any team, especially one as disadvantaged by geography and economics as the Brewers, is intentionally setting oneself up for misery on purpose.

[Brewcrew82]

43 minutes ago, JefferyLeonard said:

And just this offseason have signed Yamamoto and Ohtani. Are they really planning for the future or are they trying to win it all now? Whatever will be will be in the future, but constantly looking ahead to the future blinds you to the here and now and you could be missing a fantastic opportunity that's staring you in the face, but your constant focus on the future doesn't allow you to see it. 

Yamamoto is also 25 years old…..Big difference from the other signings you’re talking about as that’s an investment in the present AND future not unlike Chourio.

[brewcrewdue80]

21 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The stockpiling of fringe relief arms and the fact the 40-man now sits at 39 with several holes that still need filling.

It's just a weird series of events. I'm sure more moves are coming but we're now into the new year and we still have no real idea where this offseason is going.

I'm not judging, I'm not complaining, it's just... weird. What matters is the roster the team fields on Opening Day but I'm scratching my head a little over how they're going to get there.

The timing of the move and trade likely deals with Hudson being DFA'd. He passes through waivers Dodgers just put him in the minors.  The way for Milw to acquire him was trading somebody and adding Hidson to their 40man in order to keep him. Maybe another team put a late claim on him?  It's sorta like I mentioned, swapping a year ahead pitcher who played in MLB for a 20th rd pick who is recovering from TJ and didn't pitch a professional inning last season.  They also picked up Crow who fits this mold in the earlier Houser/Taylor trade.  Moves that may help the future of the team, options/performance/ team control as soon as this season or, the following season or 2.  The kid we gave up has 0 shot of helping in 2024 or 2025.

[Joseph Zarr]

A completely unheralded part of this deal is we have a Hernan Perez look back in the clubhouse:

Glorious.

[Matt Breen]

4 hours ago, TURBO said:

It's a beauty, eh.

[ReverendBrewmeister]

Between Bryan Hudson (6'8") and Clayton Andrews (5'6"), the Brewers will have quite a wide spectrum of height for their potential lefty bullpen candidates.