Brewers Video
As of this moment, according to Cot's Contracts, the Brewers have a projected Opening Day payroll just under $98 million for 2024. That's far from fixed, not least because it only estimates arbitration awards for key players with high salaries, like Corbin Burnes and Willy Adames. Still, that's the most reliable number we have. If the season began tomorrow, the Brewers would be in line for a payroll right around that figure.
It's safe to say that they have more room in their budget. In 2021, they were at almost exactly this level of spending, but that was in reaction to the pandemic and its ravages on seasonal revenues in 2020. In 2022, they spent almost $132 million on the Opening Day 26-man roster, and last year, it was right around $120 million. There have been some reports that the team will trim its payroll even further for 2024, in light of the fairly extreme uncertainty around their local TV rights beyond this final season of their contract with the soon-defunct Diamond Sports Group, owners of Bally Sports Wisconsin and the other Bally Sports affiliates. We're not talking about stopping at $100 million, though. At a minimum, you'd figure the Brewers have $110 million in the budget, and $125 million still doesn't seem like a total pipe dream.
It's important to note those numbers, and the difference between them, because it's right around the same as the projected arbitrated salary for Burnes. As has been true since (seemingly) 18 months ago, there are two universes in which the Brewers exist right now: one in which they trade Burnes, and one in which they don't. If they trade him, they'll obviously have a hole at the top of their starting rotation, but they'll also gain an extra $15 million or more with which to fill it. If they don't, they still need at least one significant offensive boost, be it at a corner infield spot or designated hitter.
Interestingly, what's happening in free agency throughout the league should inform their decision about Burnes, though it obviously can't be left to fully determine it. As has happened for the last half-decade or so, there's a marked gap between the going rate for pitchers and that for hitters. Look no further than the deals signed within the last 10 days. Mitch Garver and Kevin Kiermaier, two credible players with clear weaknesses and limitations but plenty of upside, signed for two years and $24 million and one year and $10.5 million, respectively. Lucas Giolito and Frankie Montas, two pretty similar players to Garver and Kiermaier, also signed this week, for two years and $38.5 million and one year and $16 million, respectively.
That's not an especially rational divergence, but it's been a trend for a while and it continues apace. It's interesting, because it underscores the difficulty the Brewers (small market, short on spending power in the short term and even shorter on surety about their future finances) would have in replacing Burnes using the money they'd save by dealing him. If they do trade him, it would seem important for them to get back a starting pitcher who's ready for immediate action in the big leagues, and narrowing the band of acceptable positions or profiles that way is never a good way to maximize value in trade talks.
Meanwhile, the relatively low cost of hitters as talented as Garver and Kiermaier suggests a surprising viability in the hope of signing someone like Rhys Hoskins or Jorge Soler. Let's circle back to the crucial numbers. Are the Brewers going to be capped at $110 or $115 million in spending for 2024? If so, they still might not be able to afford Soler or Hoskins, though it would matter which end of that spectrum they inhabit. If, by contrast, they can spend their way up to or beyond $120 million, either of those guys (or another hitter like them) could be in play. In such a scenario, they'd have a pretty complete team, and they would do well to hold onto Burnes.
On the other hand, the same market forces suggest to us that Burnes would command a significant haul in any trade. The Red Sox, in the wake of signing Giolito, successfully traded Chris Sale (with a bloated contract and an extremely spotty recent record of health and performance) for the reasonably promising Vaughn Grissom, who will be under team control for another half-decade. Burnes, to say the least, would fetch much more. If the budget is even very slightly tighter than we've been assuming, dealing Burnes might make sense, because it's the one way they could fill two important holes in one fell swoop. A Burnes deal should net a couple of impressive pieces, including one who could be slotted right into next year's roster. But it would also give them financial flexibility, so whichever deficiency wasn't well-addressed by the deal could be filled by Arnold via free agency.
It seems unlikely, especially because of the aforementioned uncertainty about the future of TV rights throughout baseball, that the Brewers are positioned to make a multi-year commitment to a free agent at an eight-figure salary. If they want to do that, though, they can get a bit creative and manage it, especially after a Burnes trade. Backloading a deal would let the team survive 2024, figure out their TV deal beyond that, and pay their new cornerstone in 2025 out of the money they won't be spending then on Burnes or Wade Miley (or, in all likelihood, Adames, or even Devin Williams).
With the many small but helpful moves the team has already made this winter, they've left themselves with relatively little in the way of urgent needs heading into the new year. If their budget is relatively healthy or flexible, they can sign one established, fearsome hitter and reinstitute themselves as favorites in the Central, even if that status be fragile. However, we don't know that that's the real state of the budget. Depending on the (currently unknowable) truth of the matter, trading Burnes could still be the springboard required to get the team to the next level.
How much do you think Matt Arnold and company will ultimately spend the rest of this winter? Does the shape of the free-agent market color your opinion of whether to trade Burnes? Let's discuss the team's options in the comments.
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now