Doesn't Woody Owe The Brewers?

[endaround]

The Brewers did not just give him $17.5 million to rehab.  They paid $17.5 million for the gamble that he could provide a 4 win season come 2026 and provide $36-40 million in value.  Looks like that is not going to happen, and instead he'll end up around 1.5 wins and $12-15 million in value.

The amount Woodruff got was right in line with what top pitchers get to rehab.  The Brewer offer is different in that most of the money ($10 million) isn't actually paid until next year. The Woodruff contract is similar to the offer the Brewers gave Hoskins coming off an injury in that they paid an amount with the hope that a return to health would pay off big time.  Neither has seem to have done so.

[Matt]

Did the Brewers owe him when he made the All Star team in 2019 but his salary was 561k? And in 2021 when he again made the ASG and was 5th in Cy Young voting but he only made $3.2 million? 

[Turning2]

1 hour ago, wiguy94 said:

So you're just going to ignore the facts presented to you, so you can just keep your original opinion? 

Woo just saying it doesn't make it a fact. Sure, maybe half the league called his agent to kick the tires looking for a low risk, lowball bargain. It doesn't sound like anybody was going to give him near what the Brewers did, or that there was enough interest to drive up the price out of MIL's range. He wouldn't have taken MIL's deal if it was substantially lower just because of the medical staff / physical therapist. It sounds like he's saying all the right things that you're expected to say to court the fans. I'm saying, maybe he should realize, having career earnings of $32 million already, maybe it's OK to show some gratitude. I know that's unheard of in this world where money is the god most people worship - it's not mine,  and be content sticking with the team that stuck with you at your lowest point. I don't think that is too much to ask, another stack of surplus wealth be damned. 

[liveforoctober]

11 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

Woo just saying it doesn't make it a fact. Sure, maybe half the league called his agent to kick the tires looking for a low risk, lowball bargain. It doesn't sound like anybody was going to give him near what the Brewers did, or that there was enough interest to drive up the price out of MIL's range. He wouldn't have taken MIL's deal if it was substantially lower just because of the medical staff / physical therapist. It sounds like he's saying all the right things that you're expected to say to court the fans. I'm saying, maybe he should realize, having career earnings of $32 million already, maybe it's OK to show some gratitude. I know that's unheard of in this world where money is the god most people worship - it's not mine,  and be content sticking with the team that stuck with you at your lowest point. I don't think that is too much to ask, another stack of surplus wealth be damned. 

.. and dare I ask where you are getting your info? You have a few insiders with all the other clubs?

[wiguy94]

9 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

Woo just saying it doesn't make it a fact. Sure, maybe half the league called his agent to kick the tires looking for a low risk, lowball bargain. It doesn't sound like anybody was going to give him near what the Brewers did, or that there was enough interest to drive up the price out of MIL's range. He wouldn't have taken MIL's deal if it was substantially lower just because of the medical staff / physical therapist. It sounds like he's saying all the right things that you're expected to say to court the fans. I'm saying, maybe he should realize, having career earnings of $32 million already, maybe it's OK to show some gratitude. I know that's unheard of in this world where money is the god most people worship - it's not mine,  and be content sticking with the team that stuck with you at your lowest point. I don't think that is too much to ask, another stack of surplus wealth be damned. 

If money doesn't matter then it shouldn't matter to the Brewers ownership group as well, right? Can't they just match the best offer Woodruff gets? The ownership group is far wealthier than any player. Why is the onus on the player to sacrifice money and not on the ownership group valued in the billions? Woodruff is selfish if he takes the best offer in FA, but the Brewers ownership group isn't selfish for valuing an annual profit over keeping him around?

[DuWayne Steurer]

29 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

Woo just saying it doesn't make it a fact. Sure, maybe half the league called his agent to kick the tires looking for a low risk, lowball bargain. It doesn't sound like anybody was going to give him near what the Brewers did, or that there was enough interest to drive up the price out of MIL's range. He wouldn't have taken MIL's deal if it was substantially lower just because of the medical staff / physical therapist. It sounds like he's saying all the right things that you're expected to say to court the fans. I'm saying, maybe he should realize, having career earnings of $32 million already, maybe it's OK to show some gratitude. I know that's unheard of in this world where money is the god most people worship - it's not mine,  and be content sticking with the team that stuck with you at your lowest point. I don't think that is too much to ask, another stack of surplus wealth be damned. 

so you've come to a conclusion with no evidence. Ignore any evidence that doesn't support your conclusion, and refuse to listen to any argument otherwise.

Secondly, baseball just doesn't work like this. I realize as fans we're biased, but players should ABSOLUTELY not feel or be compelled to take "discounts" to stay with a team because they were done a solid for rehab or any other reason. MLB players earning potential is stunted for the first several years of their careers and while it's a lot more than the average Joe, it's still a tiny slice of the pie, proportionate to the revenue MLB generates. NOBODY should be compelled to take a "discount" because someone did them a favor.

The Brewers signed Woody in good faith knowing he was hurt, and he will have fulfilled the requirements of the contract both parties agreed to. Saying his integrity is at stake if he doesn't offer them a discount is unhinged.

[Brock Beauchamp]

34 minutes ago, wiguy94 said:

If money doesn't matter then it shouldn't matter to the Brewers ownership group as well, right? Can't they just match the best offer Woodruff gets? The ownership group is far wealthier than any player. Why is the onus on the player to sacrifice money and not on the ownership group valued in the billions? Woodruff is selfish if he takes the best offer in FA, but the Brewers ownership group isn't selfish for valuing an annual profit over keeping him around?

this this this this

[adambr2]

1 hour ago, Turning2 said:

Woo just saying it doesn't make it a fact. Sure, maybe half the league called his agent to kick the tires looking for a low risk, lowball bargain. It doesn't sound like anybody was going to give him near what the Brewers did, or that there was enough interest to drive up the price out of MIL's range. He wouldn't have taken MIL's deal if it was substantially lower just because of the medical staff / physical therapist. It sounds like he's saying all the right things that you're expected to say to court the fans. I'm saying, maybe he should realize, having career earnings of $32 million already, maybe it's OK to show some gratitude. I know that's unheard of in this world where money is the god most people worship - it's not mine,  and be content sticking with the team that stuck with you at your lowest point. I don't think that is too much to ask, another stack of surplus wealth be damned. 

So you think he just totally made it up. What earthly reason would he have to do that?

Brandon Woodruff has been about as much of a class act as can be in Milwaukee and has provided far, far more in total value than $32M to the Brewers organization over the course of his career.

Forgive me if I can’t quite buy into the theory that he and his family now “owe” the Brewers because billionaire Mark Attanasio found it in his heart to scrounge up enough coin to take a rehab shot on him. 

It was a situation that made sense for both sides, nothing more. 

It’s clear that you posted this looking for validation, not debate, and when you didn’t get that validation you’ve ignored all evidence that people have presented that is contrary to your argument.

[liveforoctober]

Now that I think about it this guy might be Brewers888's burner account... one left and the other is now here.

[Matt]

It's just wild to me that someone would think Woodruff owes an organization when he plays in a sport that artificially keeps player salaries down for almost a decade. 

[homer]

[Cool Hand Lucroy]

Kind of feel like this thread has derailed a bit. I suppose my takeaway is that a) the Brewers probably owe Woody significantly more than the other way around and b) the Brewers still did right by him--lots of teams would've done worse.

[Brewer77]

The Brewers will have invested about $42M in Brandon Woodruff once this deal is up. He has given them (so far) 690 innings of 3.09 ERA ball (17.7 bWAR). If anyone is getting the short end of the stick here, it’s Woodruff

[Turning2]

1 hour ago, liveforoctober said:

Now that I think about it this guy might be Brewers888's burner account... one left and the other is now here.

LOL.. Nope, just a new dude with an independent mind. 

[Turning2]

2 hours ago, adambr2 said:

So you think he just totally made it up. What earthly reason would he have to do that?

Brandon Woodruff has been about as much of a class act as can be in Milwaukee and has provided far, far more in total value than $32M to the Brewers organization over the course of his career.

Forgive me if I can’t quite buy into the theory that he and his family now “owe” the Brewers because billionaire Mark Attanasio found it in his heart to scrounge up enough coin to take a rehab shot on him. 

It was a situation that made sense for both sides, nothing more. 

It’s clear that you posted this looking for validation, not debate, and when you didn’t get that validation you’ve ignored all evidence that people have presented that is contrary to your argument.

Nope, I don't care about validation or affirmation. I was just wondering what the general sentiment about him leaving soon might be. People love him now. I'm anticipating that the general fan base might feel a bit of resentment when he flies the coop after they spent a lot of money for half a season of starts. Really nothing more, nothing less than that. I'm not saying he made it all up, but people in the spotlight or even in polite conversation will sometimes embellish and spin the truth to fit the situation and / or agenda at hand. 

[Turning2]

3 hours ago, liveforoctober said:

.. and dare I ask where you are getting your info? You have a few insiders with all the other clubs?

Oh yes, everybody that posts online is required to have insider sources. We all post opinions, the majority of which are derived from what we see or read. I form viewpoints like everyone else from observation and discerning what of the available information may or may not be entirely truthful. 

You have your opinion, that's fine. 

[adambr2]

6 hours ago, Turning2 said:

Nope, I don't care about validation or affirmation. I was just wondering what the general sentiment about him leaving soon might be. People love him now. I'm anticipating that the general fan base might feel a bit of resentment when he flies the coop after they spent a lot of money for half a season of starts. Really nothing more, nothing less than that. I'm not saying he made it all up, but people in the spotlight or even in polite conversation will sometimes embellish and spin the truth to fit the situation and / or agenda at hand. 

The same as when any other player not named Jesse Winker leaves the Brewers. Thank you for the memories, wish you the best.

Your original post seems to imply that the Brewers did Woodruff a huge favor with the contract, but it was a business decision, just like non-tendering him in the first place was a business decision. 

They did it because they knew if he got healthy they could potentially get the production out of him that they have so far.

[Jake McKibbin]

13 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

You recall incorrectly. He's spoken about it publicly that he had multiple offers there at the end.

If I recall correctly, he was about to sign with Boston when the Brewers called. He mentioned in an interview a while back there hadn't actually been any communication from them up until that point, and Boston had a pretty comparable offer on the table

[BrewerFan]

15 hours ago, Turning2 said:

Everybody loves the fairytale story of his overcoming the massive shoulder injury. He's come back to initial success. Should he maintain that effectiveness for the rest of the season, he's going to be a prized free agent. I have no doubt he will jump to the highest bidder as soon as possible. But am I the only one that feels like that would be a grossly ungrateful "thanks suckers" move?  - "Thanks for letting me rehab on your very generous dime, that was swell of you, but I'm leaving regardless". Woody would possibly be out of pro ball if the Brewers hadn't offered him a really nice contract knowing they were paying for nothing for almost half of its duration. 

No.

-Woody would not be out of pro-baseball without the Brewers. I think it's possible he took less money to stay with the Brewers, but he came back because he was comfortable here. That's an opinion, but what's not is that SOME team would have given him money to miss a year, rehab and then bank on him coming back. 2/17.5 was extremely reasonable. 

-I think Woody WANTS to be in Milwaukee.

But what price are we talking about? I've said that if Woody can keep building off what he's done thus far, I'd be on board to give up 3/60. That's IF he can keep locating the ball as he has, he can keep building off each start(the 2nd start back is always huge for shoulder injuries). 

And I think it's possible given how Attanasio has said Woodruff is not only one of his favorite players, but one of his favorite PEOPLE.

 

That said, 3/60 was IF he kept throwing well AND he kept improving his velo. So he's sitting 95-96 and can touch 97 at times as he rebuilds strength, even top out at 98. 

 

But, if he does that and another team is willing to offer 6/140...no, he does not "owe" the Brewers 80M dollars. He OWES his family what's best for them. 

I think he wants to be in Milwaukee. I think he'd prefer it. I don't think you give up generational wealthy out of sentimentality. 

 

So I hope we can work something out, namely because it'll mean that Woodruff has thrown the ball well enough that we want to. And maybe at that piont, he'll take a LITTLE less to stay. The Brewers can certainly expand the payroll beyond where they currently are, but they can't give a pitcher who'll be 33 6 years or 25M a year.

 

Bottom line- The ONLY thing Woodruff has owed the Milwaukee Brewers was going out there every 5th day when possible and to be a great leader and to take his job seriously. He's done that, he's a Brewers icon and he owes them nothing more.  

[BrewerFan]

14 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

30 mil seems like a lot to risk for one year of Woo, or a draft pick.  Think with his buyout on the mutual option its either re-sign longer term or adios.

You don't factor in the 10M buyout. That money is gone and spent.

Of course you offer him the QO if he finishes the year strong(this is ALL operating under the assumption that he finishes strong and actually gets stronger physically). 

 

What's more, the QO is pretty much a given based on how he looks now. He's going to turn it down most likely. He'll want at least the QO but that price over multiple years. 

I'm hoping he likes Milwaukee...based on everything he's said and he wants to stay with one team...and for that reason he comes back. But if he doesn't want to, you offer the QO, you take the pick and if he opts in, you take the player for a year and ~20M. Win/Win. 

[Jake McKibbin]

Qualifying offer for 2025 is expected to be a little over $20m for those wondering ($21.05 in 2024)

[BrewerFan]

13 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

It goes both ways.  Maybe the Brewers did do him a solid.  Wouldn't that be owed to Woo when he came back and tried to pitch for the team in the post season on an already compromised shoulder?

He didn't try and come back and pitch on a compromised shoulder. He had a shoulder injury that kept him out most of the year. He was back, throwing the ball exceptionally well, they took their time bringing him back and he hurt his arm after a very strong start vs the Marlins near the end of the year, not this version where he was hurt and he sucked it up(in a FA year) and tried to gut through it for the Brewers. 

That'd be more akin to Ben Sheets and the Brewers and that probably ended HIS career, VERY different situation from Woodruff. He'd have been pitching for any other team in baseball in that same situation. 

 

15 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

The buyout really doesn't matter after it happens. It's sunk cost at that point. Like Woodruff isn't going to accept the QO saying I'm getting $30M to stay in Milwaukee. 

This argument just fundamentally doesn't make any sense. 

That money from this year(it's effectively deferred money) has nothing to do with the QO. 

It won't happen, but lets just say it did(arguments sake). Rhys Hoskins goes OFF and hits .350 with 15 HRs in the final month and then he's the NLCS MVP and his value goes up, he's looking great, he opts out of his deal.

That plays NO ROLE into the Brewers offering him the QO.

 

2 factors and 2 factors only. 

1-Will he sign it. Do you want that player for 1 year at 21.05/Is he worth it.
2-If he signs it, does it cripple your franchise. 

It appears as though TWO-STARTS-IN...and I'm very guilty of projecting based on what I see, but 2 starts isn't enough to answer the 1st question. 
The 2nd question, no, it's not going to cripple the Brewers. I have ZERO doubt the Brewers could add 20M in payroll if they wanted to for a year. I suspect as they work out the TV deal...which the team has said will hurt in the short term, but be very beneficial in the long run, they'll be able to be closer to that 140-150M in the next few years. Maybe once they pay down some of the debt from the recent investments or maybe just because they've getting probably  about 150M from revenue sharing(obviously you have to pay MilB players more, you have to have a world wide scouting apparatus, you need to be able to spend 15M on draft picks, ~5M on IFA)...

 

Anyway, keeping Woodruff for another year, irrespective of his buyout will not hurt this team IF he declines the QO. another 1st rd pick. If he picks it up, a under market starting pitcher you can look to trade him or...have another ace in your roation in the year where the Brewers window was REALLY supposed to pop open. By then, hopefully Mis will be extended, Pratt will be in AAA and Adams, depending on how long he's out for could be our 1B with Murray and others knocking on the door. 

 

Win-Win. 

[adambr2]

13 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

If money doesn't matter then it shouldn't matter to the Brewers ownership group as well, right? Can't they just match the best offer Woodruff gets? The ownership group is far wealthier than any player. Why is the onus on the player to sacrifice money and not on the ownership group valued in the billions? Woodruff is selfish if he takes the best offer in FA, but the Brewers ownership group isn't selfish for valuing an annual profit over keeping him around?

This. I always get a kick out of the “where’s the loyalty from this greedy millionaire” arguments.

Meanwhile the ones who aren’t willing to match the best offer at the other side of the table is the ownership group who has seen the value of the team more than double from 600M in 2014 to 1.4 billion in 2024. On top of annual operating profits.

[nate82]

6 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

Meanwhile the ones who aren’t willing to match the best offer at the other side of the table is the ownership group who has seen the value of the team more than double from 600M in 2014 to 1.4 billion in 2024. On top of annual operating profits.

The value of the team increasing has no bearing on signing FA's.  The only time you get that value is when you sell and well if the owner is selling they are not picking up a FA.  So why even include this?  Operating profits sure I get that but team value?

The only way to get at that value would be to sell and to sell fully.  MLB has rules for borrowing and needs to approve the loans before a team can get one.  So borrowing on the teams value isn't really an option other than in an emergency.  The most recent team to do a loan were the Padres and it was for $50mm for payroll in 2023.  I don't believe MLB would allow teams to take out a loan just to sign FA's.  

[adambr2]

30 minutes ago, nate82 said:

The value of the team increasing has no bearing on signing FA's.  The only time you get that value is when you sell and well if the owner is selling they are not picking up a FA.  So why even include this?  Operating profits sure I get that but team value?

The only way to get at that value would be to sell and to sell fully.  MLB has rules for borrowing and needs to approve the loans before a team can get one.  So borrowing on the teams value isn't really an option other than in an emergency.  The most recent team to do a loan were the Padres and it was for $50mm for payroll in 2023.  I don't believe MLB would allow teams to take out a loan just to sign FA's.  

Wasn’t really the point of what I posted. I wasn’t implying that the owners of the team could borrow against their value, but their net worth still increases accordingly to their in proportion to the increase in value of their asset.

It's just about the irony of bemoaning players for prioritizing money over loyalty when the guys writing the checks are far richer and rarely get subjected to the same criticism. Nothing more.