Harrison Extension

[rickh150]

Pitcher A pitches well…

Joe Schmo says to extend him……..

Im looking forward to a day when someone says to extend AFTER a bad start or two. Even then.  That would say something!  Confidence in the player, not just happy because of a great performance.

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

1 hour ago, rickh150 said:

Pitcher A pitches well…

Joe Schmo says to extend him……..

Im looking forward to a day when someone says to extend AFTER a bad start or two. Even then.  That would say something!  Confidence in the player, not just happy because of a great performance.

I will go on the record now as being in favor of giving QP an extension.  I get that he may not pitch for us in 2026, and there may be no season in 2027, but thought he was dynamic for us last season.

I would not want to give him a $100M deal, but given what he has proven, and given his current injury risk, buying out the remaining 3 Arby Years (2027, 2028, 2029), with 2 team options for 2030-2031 might be worth it.    $4 / $7 / $10 for Arby Years, with Team Options for $13/$17 and buyouts of $2/$2

So 3 Years/$25 million guaranteed, and 5 years $51 million if fully extended.   

[True Blue Brew Crew]

The model that has been working extremely well is to get your 5 years out of them, a good part of which will be among the best they ever have, and then flip them before year six to restock. It's not just what the Brewers have been doing, it's their stated approach.

I see no reason to stray from that plan. Especially when you see the return they're getting for 1 year guys, the cost in dollars for pitching on long term deals, and the high probability of injury that is exponential the longer the deal.

Burn 'em up while they're young and cheap and let someone else pay the premium for the arm with all the miles racked up on it. With the bonus of getting a haul for turning over that right to someone else.

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

Which deals have worked out for us through where we trade a player 1 year from FA?  We’ve made some outstanding trades, but they seem to be where we are trading prospects for young pre-arby guys who haven’t fully hit their stride (Contreras, Adames, Priester, Harrison)

In terms of the pure trades, I do not think we’ve done well with the 6th year guys (Burnes, Hader, etc). Jury is still out on the Peralta trade.

if we roll with the 5-6 year strategy and then let the guys go (Adames), I can live with that as we get often a peak year out of them.

 

[sveumrules]

6 minutes ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

Which deals have worked out for us through where we trade a player 1 year from FA?

Contreras was an immediate downstream result from the Hader trade, Harrison is the same thing for the Williams trade except we mined an additional 2.6 WAR (en route to a third straight Division Title) from Durbin in the interim.

Burnes put up 4.5 rWAR in his lone Baltimore season, Ortiz is at 4.9 WAR so far with another 1.4 rWAR from DL Hall and the Brewers have won the 2nd most games in MLB since trading Corbin. I'd say that's been working just fine too.

Everybody wanted Coby Mayo instead, couldn't believe the Brewers settled for the package they got and didn't hold out for the more highly rated slugging third baseman. He's got -0.6 WAR for his career so far.

[yfinn6]

3 hours ago, rickh150 said:

Pitcher A pitches well…

Joe Schmo says to extend him……..

Im looking forward to a day when someone says to extend AFTER a bad start or two. Even then.  That would say something!  Confidence in the player, not just happy because of a great performance.

Great post. 

Joe Schmo starts a thread with of discussion. 

Joe Blow poo-poos it. Not opening the thread also would've been an option, but thanks for leaving no doubt. 

[markedman5]

1 hour ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

I will go on the record now as being in favor of giving QP an extension.  I get that he may not pitch for us in 2026, and there may be no season in 2027, but thought he was dynamic for us last season.

I would not want to give him a $100M deal, but given what he has proven, and given his current injury risk, buying out the remaining 3 Arby Years (2027, 2028, 2029), with 2 team options for 2030-2031 might be worth it.    $4 / $7 / $10 for Arby Years, with Team Options for $13/$17 and buyouts of $2/$2

So 3 Years/$25 million guaranteed, and 5 years $51 million if fully extended.   

Not with his injury…….

[BrewerFan]

9 hours ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

Sproat?  I love the potential, but he hasn’t shown anything yet.  The guy has an ERA pushing 6 (I realize ERA is not the end all be all)

I think you’re underselling Patrick.  The guy has been lights out this season.

Well... I don't believe I am and I think you're underselling Sproat by saying he "hasn't shown anything at all."

Patrick is a right hander who throws about 94, is at about 6.6 K/9, his walks are up from last year... and he'll be 28 this year. I'm not all that clear what extending him does. We've got him until he's 33/34. 

Sproat, who has a better xFIP than Patrick, is the type of pitcher who you could probably extend cheap now. If you wait until he harnasses his stuff(like '21 Burnes)... it'll probably be too late. 

[Frisbee Slider]

In most cases, Milwaukee should enjoy the ride for up to six seasons for young players. Get peak performance at affordable prices then let another team pay exorbitant salaries when they are aging veterans in their 30's. 

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

I think this is definitely the reality of a successful small market team in MLB.

what makes this so frustrating though is the need for all of your well performing prospects to more or less reach their peak at the same time to have a shot at a World Series.

not saying that is impossible, but will be extraordinarily difficult.  The good news is that when we do win a World Series we will absolutely have earned it as compared to some teams that just buy it.

I think the passion for the Dodgers is a mile wide, but only an inch deep.

 

[homer]

2 hours ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

I think this is definitely the reality of a successful small market team in MLB.

what makes this so frustrating though is the need for all of your well performing prospects to more or less reach their peak at the same time to have a shot at a World Series.

not saying that is impossible, but will be extraordinarily difficult.  The good news is that when we do win a World Series we will absolutely have earned it as compared to some teams that just buy it.

I think the passion for the Dodgers is a mile wide, but only an inch deep.

 

Yeah I think that's accurate. The timing has to be just right, and you have to have the right mix of hitters and pitchers coming of age around the same time. I am giddy thinking about the next 4 - 5 years. The Brewers are going to be good for a while.

[Fear The Chorizo]

13 minutes ago, homer said:

Yeah I think that's accurate. The timing has to be just right, and you have to have the right mix of hitters and pitchers coming of age around the same time. I am giddy thinking about the next 4 - 5 years. The Brewers are going to be good for a while.

What the Brewers have done is not rely on a "wave" of prospects opening a window of mlb success - they have a steady stream of talent at all levels and continue to add more to the system every year.  They are doing everything right as a small market wanting to contend within this godforsaken economic system that is far from even.

[Frisbee Slider]

41 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

They are doing everything right as a small market wanting to contend within this godforsaken economic system that is far from even.

If the system were even, would Milwaukee be better or worse off?

I agree with all your points.

[cragi]

25 minutes ago, Frisbee Slider said:

If the system were even, would Milwaukee be better or worse off?

I agree with all your points.

If MLB were even, I think the Brewers would dominate. The scouting and development remains critical, but now they would also be able to compete on player price and hold onto their talent longer. Unless teams started throwing silly money at gutting our system. Imagine having the tradeable pipeline of talent, plus being able to hold onto Turang, Miz and Contreras for longer into their prime. 

[Outlander]

Low key it is good that the Brewers can't hold onto Burnes, Adames, Williams, Peralta, Contreras, Turang. They really could be worse off if they paid their guys long term.

[Frisbee Slider]

32 minutes ago, cragi said:

The scouting and development remains critical, but now they would also be able to compete on player price and hold onto their talent longer.

Fair. 
At the same time, if the lazy bottom feeding teams also get a leg up and keep their talent longer it might end up being a wash. 
Milwaukee is excellent at optimizing the quirks of the current system.

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, cragi said:

If MLB were even, I think the Brewers would dominate. The scouting and development remains critical, but now they would also be able to compete on player price and hold onto their talent longer. Unless teams started throwing silly money at gutting our system. Imagine having the tradeable pipeline of talent, plus being able to hold onto Turang, Miz and Contreras for longer into their prime. 

Or is the Brewers success a product of having to constantly trade impending free agents which keeps adding extra minor league talent into the organization beyond the amateur draft/international signings. 

If all things were equal, that avenue of adding extra talent would likely diminish if  not dry up completely. 

[liveforoctober]

5 hours ago, Frisbee Slider said:

In most cases, Milwaukee should enjoy the ride for up to six seasons for young players. Get peak performance at affordable prices then let another team pay exorbitant salaries when they are aging veterans in their 30's. 

Which is the opposite of what this thread is requesting (and I agree with you btw). The only way this system works to provide enough above average talent to compete consistently is if the wheels don't stop churning in that cadence. The long term contracts offered have to be so limited and strategic. A few bad 8 figure deals or 1 bad 9 figure deal blows the whole thing up.

That's why Turang probably has to go when his time is done. Contreras hurts a bit more to me but the same thing.

Harrison looks to be an incredible find and we are going to be lucky to have him for half a decade. But the beat goes on...

[sveumrules]

57 minutes ago, Outlander said:

Low key it is good that the Brewers can't hold onto Burnes, Adames, Williams, Peralta, Contreras, Turang. They really could be worse off if they paid their guys long term.

Brewers Hader (316 IP)
58 ERA- | 63 FIP-
+14.22 WPA | 11.1 rWAR
notBrewers Hader (196 IP)
72 ERA- | 77 FIP-
+7.21 WPA | 3.8 rWAR
[Josh has maybe had the most success post trade, but was paid commensurately at $56M for those 196 IP from 2022 to 2025. He has yet to pitch this season with a biceps issue and has two years and $38M remaining beyond the $19M he is making this year]

20-23 Burnes (622 IP)
68 ERA- | 67 FIP-
18.7 rWAR | 17.9 fWAR
24-25 Burnes (258 IP)
71 ERA- | 90 FIP-
6.3 rWAR | 4.6 fWAR
[not much difference in run prevention but a big step back in the peripherals before requiring TJ. Even in some kind of hypothetically more financially equitable MLB where teams had better chance of retaining their homegrown stars Milwaukee might have lost out anyway given Corbin's stated desire to be closer to family in Arizona]

21-24 Adames (2,356 PA)
113 wRC+ | 15.9 WAR
-1 DRS | +19 FRV
25-26 Adames (892 PA)
102 wRC+ | 3.9 WAR
-1 DRS | -2 FRV
[had a perfectly fine season in 2025 in line with his career norms, but has had a rough start to this year (along with the rest of the Giants, who are a pretty good example of where signing a bunch of expensive but not top tier free agents can get you) with five years $140M left after this year]

20-24 Williams (222 IP)
41 ERA- | 53 FIP-
+14.33 WPA | 9.4 rWAR
25-26 Williams (78 IP)
116 ERA- | 61 FIP-
+1.00 WPA | -0.7 rWAR
[peripherals have backed up a little bit, but run prevention thru the roof of the skyscraper. From 2020 to 2024 Devin had an 82.8% strand rate that was 2nd best among all relievers (min. 150 IP), from 2025 to 2026 his 59.2% strand rate is dead last among all relievers (min. 70 IP). Maybe none of it would have happened if he just stayed in lil old Milwaukee, but a good example of the volatility inherent even amongst elite relievers]

But yeah, instead of having all those guys, at market rate salaries, the Brewers have had Contreras, Payamps, Ortiz, Hall, Durbin, Harrison, Drohan, and Hamilton with Blake Burke and Brady Ebel (believe he was drafted with the Adames pick?) as potential future contributors down the road too.

For now, with the current economic system I agree that Milwaukee's inability to compete financially is somewhat of a benefit because it limits them to one or two "big" contracts at a time, and with their player development and procurement apparatus they can identify potential contributors from the lowest levels of amateur baseball all the way up thru MLB players sitting stagnant in other orgs.

[liveforoctober]

16 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

Brewers Hader (316 IP)
58 ERA- | 63 FIP-
+14.22 WPA | 11.1 rWAR
notBrewers Hader (196 IP)
72 ERA- | 77 FIP-
+7.21 WPA | 3.8 rWAR
[Josh has maybe had the most success post trade, but was paid commensurately at $56M for those 196 IP from 2022 to 2025. He has yet to pitch this season with a biceps issue and has two years and $38M remaining beyond the $19M he is making this year]

20-23 Burnes (622 IP)
68 ERA- | 67 FIP-
18.7 rWAR | 17.9 fWAR
24-25 Burnes (258 IP)
71 ERA- | 90 FIP-
6.3 rWAR | 4.6 fWAR
[not much difference in run prevention but a big step back in the peripherals before requiring TJ. Even in some kind of hypothetically more financially equitable MLB where teams had better chance of retaining their homegrown stars Milwaukee might have lost out anyway given Corbin's stated desire to be closer to family in Arizona]

21-24 Adames (2,356 PA)
113 wRC+ | 15.9 WAR
-1 DRS | +19 FRV
25-26 Adames (892 PA)
102 wRC+ | 3.9 WAR
-1 DRS | -2 FRV
[had a perfectly fine season in 2025 in line with his career norms, but has had a rough start to this year (along with the rest of the Giants, who are a pretty good example of where signing a bunch of expensive but not top tier free agents can get you) with five years $140M left after this year]

20-24 Williams (222 IP)
41 ERA- | 53 FIP-
+14.33 WPA | 9.4 rWAR
25-26 Williams (78 IP)
116 ERA- | 61 FIP-
+1.00 WPA | -0.7 rWAR
[peripherals have backed up a little bit, but run prevention thru the roof of the skyscraper. From 2020 to 2024 Devin had an 82.8% strand rate that was 2nd best among all relievers (min. 150 IP), from 2025 to 2026 his 59.2% strand rate is dead last among all relievers (min. 70 IP). Maybe none of it would have happened if he just stayed in lil old Milwaukee, but a good example of the volatility inherent even amongst elite relievers]

But yeah, instead of having all those guys, at market rate salaries, the Brewers have had Contreras, Payamps, Ortiz, Hall, Durbin, Harrison, Drohan, and Hamilton with Blake Burke and Brady Ebel (believe he was drafted with the Adames pick?) as potential future contributors down the road too.

For now, with the current economic system I agree that Milwaukee's inability to compete financially is somewhat of a benefit because it limits them to one or two "big" contracts at a time, and with their player development and procurement apparatus they can identify potential contributors from the lowest levels of amateur baseball all the way up thru MLB players sitting stagnant in other orgs.

Lockridge!

[sveumrules]

28 minutes ago, liveforoctober said:

Lockridge!

Good call. Forgot Cortes was in that deal along with Quintana.

[wiguy94]

10 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

Good call. Forgot Cortes was in that deal along with Quintana.

He was but if I recall the Brewers paid down his salary to the minimum in that trade so I don't think Cortes was carrying much of any value in that trade. Quintana the prospect was the value going out.

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

2 hours ago, Frisbee Slider said:

Fair. 
At the same time, if the lazy bottom feeding teams also get a leg up and keep their talent longer it might end up being a wash. 
Milwaukee is excellent at optimizing the quirks of the current system.

The question might be (and why get worried for something that might not happen), how does our system need to change if pre-FA control is reduced to 4 or 5 years instead of the 6-7?

Does that add more of a market incentive to do these early 6-8 year deals in the $40-60 million range for our premium players.   I think we all agree that the $20-$30M/per deals really crash our system.

Between Braun, Yelich, its hard to argue that either of those deals worked out for us.  Woody hasn't (but was realistically a 1 year deal at that premium price so it doesn't hurt long term)...  I agree that signing Adames, Williams, Burnes, and Hader would not have been in our best interests.

My question would be though, would 1 extra year of Adames last year helped us?   Would 1 extra year of Contreras or Turang help us in 2028, 2029, or 2030?

I think my original point was, would it be a valuable strategy to try and extend (early) our control over some of these premium players from 6-7 years to 8-9 years if possible.   Not keep them for their career, but try and get year 1 or 1/2 of their FA.   I realize this is a dicey proposition though.  Extend the wrong players, and you end up with bad contracts.  Wait too long for the player to establish themselves, and there really is no reason for them to give up their most valuable 1-2 years of FA.

Then again, an injury can come out of nowhere (QP, Woody, etc)

[liveforoctober]

23 minutes ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

The question might be (and why get worried for something that might not happen), how does our system need to change if pre-FA control is reduced to 4 or 5 years instead of the 6-7?

Does that add more of a market incentive to do these early 6-8 year deals in the $40-60 million range for our premium players.   I think we all agree that the $20-$30M/per deals really crash our system.

Between Braun, Yelich, its hard to argue that either of those deals worked out for us.  Woody hasn't (but was realistically a 1 year deal at that premium price so it doesn't hurt long term)...  I agree that signing Adames, Williams, Burnes, and Hader would not have been in our best interests.

My question would be though, would 1 extra year of Adames last year helped us?   Would 1 extra year of Contreras or Turang help us in 2028, 2029, or 2030?

I think my original point was, would it be a valuable strategy to try and extend (early) our control over some of these premium players from 6-7 years to 8-9 years if possible.   Not keep them for their career, but try and get year 1 or 1/2 of their FA.   I realize this is a dicey proposition though.  Extend the wrong players, and you end up with bad contracts.  Wait too long for the player to establish themselves, and there really is no reason for them to give up their most valuable 1-2 years of FA.

Then again, an injury can come out of nowhere (QP, Woody, etc)

That's the forever dance. Which guys are worth rolling the dice on AND are those players willing to cash in early. The Brewers just took a pretty decent leap of faith with Pratt. It seems we 'guessed' correctly on Chourio. We likely have missed the boat on Turang and Miz and possibly Made.

So back to your original topic and proposal ... are we sure about Harrison after 50+ innings? Are you ready to commit that much financially before the league has had a chance to adjust and figure his new self out? Is the payoff of having him for an extra year worth the tighter financial space that puts us in while we are competing the next 2-3 years?

[CheezWizHed]

30 minutes ago, TwinsBrewersWorldSeries said:

The question might be (and why get worried for something that might not happen), how does our system need to change if pre-FA control is reduced to 4 or 5 years instead of the 6-7?

Does that add more of a market incentive to do these early 6-8 year deals in the $40-60 million range for our premium players.   I think we all agree that the $20-$30M/per deals really crash our system.

Between Braun, Yelich, its hard to argue that either of those deals worked out for us.  Woody hasn't (but was realistically a 1 year deal at that premium price so it doesn't hurt long term)...  I agree that signing Adames, Williams, Burnes, and Hader would not have been in our best interests.

My question would be though, would 1 extra year of Adames last year helped us?   Would 1 extra year of Contreras or Turang help us in 2028, 2029, or 2030?

I think my original point was, would it be a valuable strategy to try and extend (early) our control over some of these premium players from 6-7 years to 8-9 years if possible.   Not keep them for their career, but try and get year 1 or 1/2 of their FA.   I realize this is a dicey proposition though.  Extend the wrong players, and you end up with bad contracts.  Wait too long for the player to establish themselves, and there really is no reason for them to give up their most valuable 1-2 years of FA.

Then again, an injury can come out of nowhere (QP, Woody, etc)

Agreed. I think people are getting the FA extensions mixed with the pre-arby extensions.  As long as you are comfortable that the player in question is a MLB talent (and not someone you won't go to arbitration for), the extensions are really pretty low risk:

• Peralta's extension was a surprise to everyone... but after that initial shock, I think it was obvious that it would be a huge benefit for the Brewers
• Chourios was again a shock... but looking like a steal.
• Ashby's might be closer to just "fair", but certainly not a bad deal.
• Pratt: I did an analysis that showed that the break even on that deal with producing like Ortiz (2 WAR).  

I've said it before and I'll keep preaching it... it isn't a "YES" or "NO" on extensions, but "How Much".  If you sign a good player to a good deal, it is ALWAYS a benefit to the team.  Good players on good deals are great trade bait (Thank you Freddie!).