Doesn't Woody Owe The Brewers?

[Brock Beauchamp]

Why are we acting like Woodruff's rehab contract is unusual? Lots of teams have leaned into signing rehab contracts, and about $15m is the going rate for the second year.

It appears there is a lot of goodwill between the Brewers and Woody. He really got the shaft by blowing out his shoulder moments before free agency. He has been in the Brewers org for a decade, it makes all the sense in the world that he wants to rehab in the org he knows and trusts. From the Brewers perspective, Woody is a good pitcher and human, one you want in your org for as long as you can afford him.

Nobody owes anybody anything in this situation, as we're talking about grown-ass adults making business decisions and being paid handsomely for it.

[Fear The Chorizo]

4 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Why are we acting like Woodruff's rehab contract is unusual? Lots of teams have leaned into signing rehab contracts, and about $15m is the going rate for the second year.

It appears there is a lot of goodwill between the Brewers and Woody. He really got the shaft by blowing out his shoulder moments before free agency. He has been in the Brewers org for a decade, it makes all the sense in the world that he wants to rehab in the org he knows and trusts. From the Brewers perspective, Woody is a good pitcher and human, one you want in your org for as long as you can afford him.

Nobody owes anybody anything in this situation, as we're talking about grown-ass adults making business decisions and being paid handsomely for it.

agreed 100%

Woody chose to take things year to year in effort to cash in via free agency the same way the Brewers' organization opted to not offer him a market-rate longterm extension and go year to year in arbitration.  With baseball money being guaranteed, such is the nature of how this works - particularly for pitchers, who I think are becoming alot like the NFL version of running backs in today's game - valuable pieces for a team who wants to contend, but increasingly replaceable if you are good at identifying arm talent and not worth paying market rates in free agency once they surpass their prime production years (i.e., turn 30) due to injury risk and performance decline.

 

[MadScientist]

The only thing Woody owes the Brewers is to pitch to the best of his abilities the rest of the season.   Given his first two starts, he's doing just that.  After that he only owes himself to do what is right for him and his family.

[gregmag]

18 hours ago, Turning2 said:

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

Man, I wish I had just a penny for every thousand online trolls who pulled this line. I could retire tomorrow. No, you don’t get an “intellectual independence” merit badge for posting a blandly petty hot take, blowing off the vastly smarter responses that you should be thanking people for spending their time typing, baselessly accusing a player of publicly lying, and then responding to a request to back up your nonsense by acting like evidence is for lesser beings.  That’s not independence — it’s vacuous belligerence.

Woodruff and the Brewers made a deal that was both sensible and honorable for both sides. Finding a way to crap on such a thing takes a rare gift.

[homer]

I owe Woody.

[wallus]

If you're gonna have a really bad game, might as well defend it to the death 

[Guest]

13 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

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

I think it all factors in.  I'm not 100% on the technicalities, if the buyout money goes in escrow, etc. but it matters.  There was a chance if the team performed poorly going into the deadline that all the buyout money could have been another teams problem.  Neither of us really knows how the team budgeted for it.  

10 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

He didn't try and come back and pitch on a compromised shoulder.

I think in context I fundamentally agree with most in the thread and the point I was making is that he had injured the shoulder earlier in the year, but came back and pitched perhaps at his own risk.  I wont pretend to be a doctor but idk Woo, Gasser, and Cortes have all had similar issues with reinjury. 

13 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

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. 

This is where Ill just agree to disagree.  Think all this is still very much in the air for him and I think 21 mil even for a single year is a lot with this payroll.  That being said it would be great if Woo returns long term.  His come back this season has been awesome, just don't see it at that number for the Brewers.

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

I think it all factors in.  I'm not 100% on the technicalities, if the buyout money goes in escrow, etc. but it matters.  There was a chance if the team performed poorly going into the deadline that all the buyout money could have been another teams problem.  Neither of us really knows how the team budgeted for it.  

You're missing the point. It's a sunken cost. You're not suddenly paying him 30M if you extend him for another year at 20M. It is irrelevant as it pertains to signing Woodruff or not. It's basically deferred money. 

We do know how the team budged for it. That was just a way to spread the money out. He got a 2 year ~17.5M extension and the last chunk of that comes next year. 

2 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

I think in context I fundamentally agree with most in the thread and the point I was making is that he had injured the shoulder earlier in the year, but came back and pitched perhaps at his own risk.  I wont pretend to be a doctor but idk Woo, Gasser, and Cortes have all had similar issues with reinjury. 

Gasser and Cortes had very different injuries. Woodruff had a capsule injury in his shoulder. 
Cortes had elbow inflammation
Gasser had Tommy John(you could say the last two were similar but not to Woodruffs).  Had Woodruff needed TJ, I suspect he'd have gotten more on a 2 year deal than 17.5. He may have gotten 2/35. Pitchers coming back from TJ have much better results after surgery than repairing an anterior capsule.

The assumption is, all pitchers are going to have injuries. You prefer it's an elbow and TJ vs a shoulder. Pitchers actually come back stronger with more velocity after TJ. It's just the opposite with the shoulder. 

 

That said, he sat out 4 months. He was given the green light. He was a pending FA and a competitor. If you want to parse out who he came back and pitched for, it was most likely for him, not as a sense of duty to the Brewers and there wasn't any indication it was compromised. 

 

2 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

This is where Ill just agree to disagree.  Think all this is still very much in the air for him and I think 21 mil even for a single year is a lot with this payroll.  That being said it would be great if Woo returns long term.  His come back this season has been awesome, just don't see it at that number for the Brewers.

No, not really. not on a 1 year deal. They're not going to not offer him a QO... that they know he'll turn down...again, assuming he continues to stay healthy and pitch well. 

Frankie Montas...came back from the similar injury, he was never the pitcher Woodruff has been.

He threw 1.1 IP and got 17M dollars.
He was then terrible for the Reds. They traded him to...us. He put up a ~4.84 ERA. He signed a contract for 1 year 17.5 with a player option for 17.5.

AGAIN, assuming Woodruff doesn't fall apart, he's a lock for a QO and he's also likely to turn it down. Probably the best of both worlds if he doesn't turn it down(but he would). 

My hope of a 3/60M deal is probably not realistic from Woodruff's perspective, but the Brewers absolutely have that money and Attanasio has said...numerous times(and has followed through) that if there was a player who could help the Brewers win, they could extend the payroll. The man he said was not only his favorite player, but person...and a well respected veteran on the other side of a bad injury(again, assuming he is, it's been two starts) would likely be that person. The Brewers payroll is less than they get from the league in revenue sharing, a number that should be going up as will their revenue should doing anything in October. 

 

But that's speculation. What's about 99% certain, Woodruff stays healthy, he pitches well, he gets a QO. The Rays would make that offer, the old As would make that offer. The Brewers are definitely going to make that offer. That's a pretty easy call.

He'll turn it down and sign for at LEAST more years if not years and AAV. It's 2025. The Cubs traded for a player who's going to get 500M in FA. The Brewers will not let him leave without at LEAST a draft pick. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

It's a sunken cost

That's not what sunk cost means.  If the Brewers trade Woodruff today is the remainder of his 2025 salary + mutual option buyout + qualifying offer a sunk cost for the Brewers?  In the context of sports sunk cost refers to money already paid not money potentially owed.  If the Brewers traded Freddy at the deadline or decline his option do you think that would change payroll going forward? If they don't trade him and pick up his option does that change payroll?  

 

4 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

We do know how the team budged for it.

We can speculate but we do not. 

 

4 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Frankie Montas...came back from the similar injury, he was never the pitcher Woodruff has been.

He threw 1.1 IP and got 17M dollars.
He was then terrible for the Reds. They traded him to...us. He put up a ~4.84 ERA. He signed a contract for 1 year 17.5 with a player option for 17.5.

I think this is making my point for me.  My neighbor told me he paid 500% the MSRP value of his car.  I don't think I would do the same.  

[Turning2]

13 hours ago, gregmag said:

Man, I wish I had just a penny for every thousand online trolls who pulled this line. I could retire tomorrow. No, you don’t get an “intellectual independence” merit badge for posting a blandly petty hot take, blowing off the vastly smarter responses that you should be thanking people for spending their time typing, baselessly accusing a player of publicly lying, and then responding to a request to back up your nonsense by acting like evidence is for lesser beings.  That’s not independence — it’s vacuous belligerence.

Woodruff and the Brewers made a deal that was both sensible and honorable for both sides. Finding a way to crap on such a thing takes a rare gift.

That's funny. I've been posting on forums for decades. Never been labelled as a troll before. No, I might be a contrarian with my own ideas rather than a go along to get along type, but I'm not a troll. I'm not the one engaging in personal attacks. I didn't blow off "smarter responses", I offered counters to some of them, don't have time to engage everybody. I've been respectful in offering my opinions. Can't say I've received the same from some here. Regardless, I'm here to talk about the Brewers, not waste my time defending against ad hominem pissing matches.

[homer]

13 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

That's funny. I've been posting on forums for decades. Never been labelled as a troll before. No, I might be a contrarian with my own ideas rather than a go along to get along type, but I'm not a troll. I'm not the one engaging in personal attacks. I didn't blow off "smarter responses", I offered counters to some of them, don't have time to engage everybody. I've been respectful in offering my opinions. Can't say I've received the same from some here. Regardless, I'm here to talk about the Brewers, not waste my time defending against ad hominem pissing matches.

The issue's core is that Brandon Woodruff said he had other/better offers, and you are choosing not to believe him. That isn't a counterargument.

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

That's not what sunk cost means.  If the Brewers trade Woodruff today is the remainder of his 2025 salary + mutual option buyout + qualifying offer a sunk cost for the Brewers?  In the context of sports sunk cost refers to money already paid not money potentially owed. 

That's literally what sunk cost means. 

I don't know where you keep pulling this "so if we trade him," nonsense out of, but that's you doing a "well it could happen." 

We were talking about extending the QUALIFYING offer to Woodruff IF he pitches well and if he continues to throw well. 

YOU stated that'd be paying him ~30M dollars next year because you're adding what is basically deferred money from this year. 

And YES, that is a sunken cost. I don't need an explanation of what sunk costs are, I understand what they are. You must be googling this as we go to be making this argument and then misinterpreting what you're reading. 

4 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

If the Brewers traded Freddy at the deadline or decline his option do you think that would change payroll going forward? If they don't trade him and pick up his option does that change payroll?  

I'm sure this sounded clever when you wrote it, but it's not really hitting the mark. 

Peralta's OPTION year is not the same as Brandon Woodruff's buyout. 

 

4 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

We can speculate but we do not. 

No, we really do. It's pretty simple. They budged to account for the 10M dollars Brandon Woodruff was GTD. You're speculating that MAYBE they traded him if the season goes south. That's not when budgeting is done.

But is there a point to any of this? Is this you just once again saying they won't offer Woodruff the QO?

 

4 hours ago, BaseballEnjoyer said:

I think this is making my point for me.  My neighbor told me he paid 500% the MSRP value of his car.  I don't think I would do the same.  

No, actually, it'd be like your neighbor telling you he got a car for...lets make 100% of MSRP here the market rate and you said, 'no, I won't make that offer that I know won't be accepted because...I just don't want to. 

Nick Martinez-A guy who'd been a reliver/starter and had a fraction of the success, one of the few pitchers who accepted the QO. 

Nick Pavetta-Declined the QO. 
Severino who in the previous SIX YEARS had thrown less than 400 innings(about half of which game in one year) and did so with an ERA over 4, he turned down the QO. 
 

 

And as it pertains to Montas, if MULTIPLE teams are offering him 17M a year and then 34M over 2 years...at SOME point it should be clear... that is the going rate. 

 

We'll see though. If Woodruff pitches well and stays healthy, we'll see if they...decline to offer that QO because they don't want to pay him 31M a year...which again, they wouldn't be doing, it's two entirely separate transactions, but...lets just say it is. 

[BrewerFan]

21 hours ago, adambr2 said:

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.

I almost spit out my coffee at this one. Where does this happen? On this forum? I don't see anyone bemoaning Adames OR hypothetically Woodruff(or Burnes, Hader, Prince, anyone really) who is or likely to leave for more money. 

The casual baseball fan does nothing BUT ***** and moan about Attansio being cheap...while few of them realize he owns about 37% of the team and most of his value is tied up in the team and our TV revenue is about 1/10th or less of the largest market teams. Even MLB's goal is to make it closer to 1/5th. 

And what is the meme you see CONSTANTLY when Attanasio, the Brewers or free agency is brought up?

 

So I'm not sure what players are getting heat for taking the money while nobody is blaming "the guys writing the checks." Right or wrong, and I'd argue it's pretty obvious they're wrongfully taking the heat almost every single time. 

 

[adambr2]

24 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

I almost spit out my coffee at this one. Where does this happen? On this forum? I don't see anyone bemoaning Adames OR hypothetically Woodruff(or Burnes, Hader, Prince, anyone really) who is or likely to leave for more money. 

The casual baseball fan does nothing BUT ***** and moan about Attansio being cheap...while few of them realize he owns about 37% of the team and most of his value is tied up in the team and our TV revenue is about 1/10th or less of the largest market teams. Even MLB's goal is to make it closer to 1/5th. 

And what is the meme you see CONSTANTLY when Attanasio, the Brewers or free agency is brought up?

 

So I'm not sure what players are getting heat for taking the money while nobody is blaming "the guys writing the checks." Right or wrong, and I'd argue it's pretty obvious they're wrongfully taking the heat almost every single time. 

 

Really? Counsell got absolutely raked over the coals for leaving for the money. Fans have absolutely criticized Adames too, even here. The whole point of this thread was someone hypothetically criticizing Woodruff.

If you’re not finding ANY former Brewer players who get criticized for leaving for more money and get accused of lack of “loyalty”, you’re not really looking.

So yeah, I totally disagree. Does Mark A get accused of being cheap? Yeah, I suppose he often does, by more of the casual fans. Does he get accused of not showing “loyalty” to a player? Not really. Did anyone accuse of him of not being loyal to Adames because he didn’t match the Giants’ offer?

I’d say a player leading for more money is typically subject to much more scrutiny on average than Mark A is for not paying said individual player.

The whole point of any of this was that Mark Attanasio is richer than all of the Brewer players combined and Brandon Woodruff owes him nothing. 

[Guest]

I will say my peace and let it rest.

34 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

That's literally what sunk cost means. 

Literally not what that means.  Buyouts aren't paid up front, if they were that would be sunk cost.  My point was you keep asserting that once that deal with Woo was signed all of the money including the buyout is "sunk cost."  It isn't unfathomable that maybe the Brewer's put those buyouts at the end of those contracts in the event they would need to trade them.   

40 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

I'm sure this sounded clever when you wrote it, but it's not really hitting the mark. 

Peralta's OPTION year is not the same as Brandon Woodruff's buyout. 

The point I'm making is that the money paid to players doesn't happen in a vacuum.  Just like Freddy's contract the dead money on the buyouts can alter what QO's a team may want to extend, what free agents they may want to sign, how MUCH they can spend, etc. 

47 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

And as it pertains to Montas, if MULTIPLE teams are offering him 17M a year and then 34M over 2 years...at SOME point it should be clear... that is the going rate. 

 My point is just because other teams are willing to pay that amount doesn't mean the Brewer's with the payroll they have should.

50 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

We'll see though. If Woodruff pitches well and stays healthy, we'll see if they...decline to offer that QO because they don't want to pay him 31M a year...which again, they wouldn't be doing, it's two entirely separate transactions, but...lets just say it is. 

What if he pitches ok and is kind of healthy...at 33 with drastically reduced velo?  I just think most people see the QO as an obvious either/or because of how teams use it.  There is way more grey area involved and that's why teams generally don't extend it to guys who may actually accept it.  Its a risk is all.

[Turning2]

1 hour ago, homer said:

The issue's core is that Brandon Woodruff said he had other/better offers, and you are choosing not to believe him. That isn't a counterargument.

Fine. Counter perspective / opinion / viewpoint whatever... Just because people say stuff doesn't mean it's true or possibly stretching the truth. I could explain how this might have applied in this case, but it's really not worth the energy. This thread has rabbit trailed enough already. 

[homer]

8 minutes ago, Turning2 said:

Fine. Counter perspective / opinion / viewpoint whatever... Just because people say stuff doesn't mean it's true or possibly stretching the truth. I could explain how this might have applied in this case, but it's really not worth the energy. This thread has rabbit trailed enough already. 

Agreed. Locking the thread.

[Brock Beauchamp]

29 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

Really? Counsell got absolutely raked over the coals for leaving for the money. Fans have absolutely criticized Adames too, even here. The whole point of this thread was someone hypothetically criticizing Woodruff.

To be fair, I think we all agree there is a higher class of baseball fan on this website. While criticism of guys like Adames is rare here (but occasionally happens), just pop on over to X or Reddit to find plenty of moronic takes of that kind. They absolutely exist within Brewers fandom.