How Brewers Can Respond After Dodgers Trade for Tarik Skubal

[Snoebird]

1 hour ago, homer said:

I know. I am not comparing the Brewers to the Dodgers. I am comparing all the big market teams that are not willing to consistently spend money. That would probably create a higher ceiling for the elite players but they would not all concentrate on one team. And you are correct that the Brewers very easily could have matched the Dodgers offer.  I am not saying they SHOULD have matched or beaten it. For all we know, the Brewers offered up better players but the Tigers just liked the Dodgers players better.

The Dodgers have the best of both worlds because of Andrew Friedman running the show. Friedman is the inventor of the Tampa Bay Model that the Brewers, Rays, Dodgers and now Marlins adhere to -- and he is Matt Arnold's mentor. So, with L.A., you get an organization that is as disciplined as the Brewers in scouting, drafting and development, plus the layer of money that allows for the acquisition of thirtysomething free-agent stars. 

[GAME05]

We struck gold with Chourio and Made and can't realistically expect to keep doing that. Sure we could flip a lot of the prospects we've got, but I'd rather be a good team for the next ten years than add another 20% to our WS odds for one year.

And it's not like the CBA will set a cap at $150m. More like $250m and the Brewers will be operating the same as now. You know the Commissioner would be thrilled at a Dodgers/Yankees WS every single year.

[tmwiese55]

I keep seeing lines along the lines "what time better than now to go for it" type thing for the Brewers.  Which I don't agree with at all, I think they think 2-3 years from now is a much much better time to go for it.  Dodgers stars will be aging hard and the dead salaries have to start hurting at some point. Yelich will be off the books and hopefully enough of these prospects hit and will be cheap and pitchers like Miz are healthy.

That said, as many of us predicted the return for Skubal was a fraction of the media bs put out there the last few months. And for what he went for, I think they probably should've done it.  However, you're also hearing stuff that he wanted LA because he knows he's signing there anyway, so do you want to take on a kind of unhappy person not totally motivated to give it all for you, comes into the equation.

I also only learned this weekend that besides the normal lack of revenue sharing in MLB with TV deals, the Dodgers get an even further exception to not share due to something put in by bankruptcy court when they got sold.  And there is really nothing MLB can do about it because it was done by the courts.  What a farce it all is. 

ETA: also Phillies will be as good as done in 2-3 years

[Jim French Stepstool]

54 minutes ago, Thurston Fluff said:

The difference isn't risk aversion. It's what risk looks like in each organization is different. The Dodgers can lose every prospect and still not have to worry about how they'll field a winning team down the road. They don't have to worry about maintaining fan interest by having a homegrown star come up from their minors. They don't have to push prospects through the system because they're needed in the majors. They can afford to string out a prospect's timeline so they control them as long as possible. They don't have to add a player who's still a year or two away from needing to be placed on the 40 man because he's needed in the majors. They can keep them in the minors until they run out of options. All of those things keeps their farm strong but has less to do with being better than it is being rich enough to do fill their roster with high priced free agents. Their prospects are not as important to the team's future as they are to the Brewers. Teams that can do that see the value in their prospects as what they can help the team get to win now. If the Brewers did that the cost to future teams would be significantly higher than it is for the Dodgers.

Very good post. The Dodgers are an extremely well-run organization, but their success has very little to do with risk, or being willing to take risk. The layers of cash buffer the element of risk tremendously.

Some clown on the MLB Network just came on the air at the top of the hour & lauded LA for their long history of being willing to take risks, eat contracts, etc. I had to hit mute.

[Matt]

1 hour ago, GAME05 said:

We struck gold with Chourio and Made and can't realistically expect to keep doing that. Sure we could flip a lot of the prospects we've got, but I'd rather be a good team for the next ten years than add another 20% to our WS odds for one year.

And it's not like the CBA will set a cap at $150m. More like $250m and the Brewers will be operating the same as now. You know the Commissioner would be thrilled at a Dodgers/Yankees WS every single year.

I'm on Team Stand-pat, but if there were moves that shifted the odds 20% I'd sign up immediately. 

[trwi7]

Just need ESPN to stop talking about the Brewers.

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/49519729

[Sixtolezcano]

On 8/2/2026 at 10:44 AM, ImissDougMelvin said:

This development has been so bizarre to me...I mean he hit 29 HR's and knocked in over 100 last year. To watch him this year is just shocking. Like how does a guy drop that fast that quickly after having a season like he did last year? What the hell changed that quickly over the offseason that he's just a shell of what he was even a year ago. It's truly bizarre. 

Ever hear of Cecil Cooper?