FVBrewerFan

I don't think HH19 is demanding everyone believe him. He is passing on info he knows many of us appreciate. Some will be skeptical, which is understandable.

53 pages, so time for a Stearns refresher. There have been reasonable rumors, even insider rumors, and plenty of wild opinions and guesses. Bottom line, Stearns is not going to get taken on a deal just to make the season interesting to us. All this plan a, plan b stuff is being taken way too far. The Brewers have plenty of assets to trade, plenty of money to spend, and plenty of needs. So yes, they are looking at all kinds of deals. Of course plans change as players move to other teams, the Brewers make their first deal etc. You can't anticipate what happens, or when, so you stay flexible. All that to say I don't doubt HH, but if you read what he actually said, nothing was much more specific than that.

They have a better opportunity to make the MLB team, get there sooner, and have more playing time immediately when they get there. Whatever happens after that is gravy.

Sure maybe the Escobar comparison is a bit much. But I think the phrasing was 'closer to Escobar than to the Seager/Correa types' or something like that. I'd generally agree with that phrasing. I agree with you that there is more improvement likely from Arcia as he beefs up a bit and just learns to hit better. However, I think the greater point is that he's unlikely to ever be a middle of the order top hitter on your team type guy. There really isn't someone behind him ready to go so a trade would still make no sense right now, but the logic that he's not a superstar type that's untradeable isn't off either. And of course D at SS is huge. There's a middle ground here among you guys arguing that I think you'd all agree on if dug out of your stances a bit. No doubt, and I would never consider Arcia untradeable. There is no such player in IMHO.

Of course it's stupid, but it's been done in the past. That said, if they agreed to a trade today of that magnitude, no they're not going to wait 4 days to announce it. A FA signing? Yea, they may wait a couple days to announce it.

If Arcia was a stock, I'm buying. Nothing is guaranteed, but I would put my money on continued improvement. You can't shrug off his age like it's nothing. At 21/22 to play MLB SS at a high level defenseivley and hit .730 to me is a good start. Some of you believe that's his ceiling, and that's fine, it could be. But I'm betting closer to .780. His ceiling is even higher than that, but I'm a fan of cautious optimism.

That......works in........movies..........not...........in real.............life. Sure, but you don't let teams shop your offers and keep you waiting as the offseason proceeds and opportunities pass you by. You can only sit on plan Yelich for so long before it hurts your offseason if it doesn't happen. I'd have no issues telling them, if your plan is to leverage my offer, yahoo japan is going to report I'm out. Would it work. No. Don't expect it to, do expect teams to understand when I make an offer you accept or reject. The Marlins know the Brewers aren't going to wait forever, and they run the risk the Brewers move on and make a deal with someone else. At the same time, the Brewers have apparently made more than one offer, so they're playing the game too. So sure, there's deadlines but I think it's a little more subtle that "you have 24 hours or we're moving on" Stearns has seemed to quickly develop a very good reputation as a GM you can deal with, judging from the large number of teams he's traded with and come close to trading with. You don't get that reputation by throwing around the used car salesman gimmicks.

That......works in........movies..........not...........in real.............life.

Regarding 40 man, you also have Perin (who is underrated here), Lara/Medeiros who could come on strong this year, Griep (someone would definitely take him in Rule 5) Herrera, another guy definitely worth protecting. Not to mention guys who could really step up who are low on the radar, which happens every year. Plus, that doesn't include the following year, when yet another impressive list will be added. You can always wait, sure, but best deals don't tend to get done when other teams know you need to unload players.

If Santana is moved you could go LF Yelich CF Phillips/Broxton RF Braun.

I would guess they plan on keeping Hader in the pen, and between Taylor Williams, Houser, Peralta, and Lopez, maybe they really like their internal candidates. Yes, plus it's still only January 24th.

I had the same position as trwi and others coming into the off-season. Trade Knebel and others for even more top shelf prospects. Don't stop rebuilding just because of season that exceeded expectations. Then I saw the list of guys who need to be protected on the 40 at the end of this year. If you haven't seen it, you really should. And that doesn't include guys for the following year, players who will pop up we're not even thinking much about, etc. So why not trade a few of them now and get a really good player under control for 5 years rather than losing players in Rule 5? Look, I'm still vehemently against some of the proposals I've seen here over the last couple months, trades involving players with 2 years of control. This Yelich trade isn't that. You're essentially trading unproven players with 6 years control for a proven player with 5 years control. Also, I've come around to accepting this isn't an either/or situation. There's not one way of doing this that's right, and one that's wrong. If they decided to trade a few players for prospects I would have been all in. Now that it looks like they want to continue to build on the success of last season, that can work also. It's not like they have abandoned the youth movement. You have Santana, Arcia, Phillips, Woodruff, Hader, Williams on the 25. By the end of 2018 you will have another 2 rookie pitchers (Being general assuming this trade), probably Dubon. After this deal, no matter who they give up, the farm will not be bare. They can only play so many guys, so these traded would need to happen at some point anyhow right? For all we know we're selling them high. All of this to say, I guess I will trust what Stearns is doing until proven otherwise.

I don't think rookie means anything. Stevens was a rookie and has done very well. Right person at right time is needed, regardless of age or experience.

X factor is we don't really know how the Brewers feel about their own prospects. I'm sure if they had a top 25 for fun, it would be different than ours. Meaning, they may not see a Brinson or Burnes as big a loss as we do.

That's a really bad comparison for Burnes. Superior tools to Davies. Burns far more Chase Anderson over Davies.... same style, stuff, stature, velocity, and etc. I find Davies a real bad comp. if you are comparing Davies, it needs to be a soft tossing control pitcher This is supposed to be about trade rumors, so didn't mean to take this off track. But Davies being a soft tosser isn't accurate. He may not be Chapman out there, but he's not Moyer either. His FB sits 91-93, Burnes may be a tick above that.

My vote is Brinson, Burnes, Harrison. If it's gotta hurt, that would hurt right?

I would deal Burnes before Peralta. Peralta is basically A RH Hader, Burnes is Davies.

But that's not easy, and would cost much more in terms of cash or prospects. Look at how the price for Darvish is spiraling up. And 5 years for a 31 year old, if that's true? For a guy who's really good but not elite. It is so tough to get a guy better than Nelson, Anderson, etc. Nobody wants to give up a young, controllable stud pitcher. That doesn't mean you can't make the team better in other ways. Yelich gives you one thing they need in the OF- LH bat.

Posted this earlier, but may have been lost in the shuffle. Yelich is LH, that's also a big factor here. Yes and no, I sort of agree with you. Then again, look at who they have, and who's on the way. All RH except Phillips, who is not a sure thing. So that's reason A to shake things up. Reason B is defense. Santana is a butcher out there. In a perfect world, they could move him to 1B but I'm guessing they thought of that long before I have, so I'm guessing they know he can't play there.

Yes and no, I sort of agree with you. Then again, look at who they have, and who's on the way. All RH except Phillips, who is not a sure thing. So that's reason A to shake things up. Reason B is defense. Santana is a butcher out there. In a perfect world, they could move him to 1B but I'm guessing they thought of that long before I have, so I'm guessing they know he can't play there.

I would be good with this, but I think I would like a lottery ticket or two in there. I think the casual fan would be irate to hear we gave up a bat like Santana for one minor leaguer. Maybe McKenzie ++ for Santana and Stokes? There's a lot we don't know about various trades in the works, but there's one thing we do know. Any trade Stearns makes or doesn't make will have zero to do with fan reaction.

I'm guessing they were never really in it and that it had a lot more do with factors other than money. I'll go out on a limb and say it has everything to do with money.

While I pegged Chacin as my #1 SP value of this offseason and think it was a good deal for the Brewers, I don't agree that assessment is fair. Teheran is durable, having thrown 185+ innings in 5 consecutive years. His only injury concerns were a knee injury in 2015 that he was able to pitch through. Chacin is not durable, having already missed significant time in multiple seasons. Teheran's contract has 2 years and $23M on it, but the 2nd year is an option, which limits the downside risk substantially. Chacin will be paid $15.5M over the next 2 years no matter what. An argument can certainly be made that Teheran may not be worth Santana straight up, but he is definitely worth significantly more than Chacin. Point is, 2 years isn't enough. If Brewers are giving up prospects, they're going to want a pitcher (or any player) in return for more years of control than that.

If it's Cleveland, keep it simple. Santana for McKenzie. Done. Cleveland gets a guy who could rather easily hit .900+ in the AL, and have him for cheap for several years. They give up a potential future ace, but it's still just that- potential.

I don't think it's booming, though, which explains why he hasn't signed anywhere yet. I have a feeling that whoever signs him is going to get him for below projections. I have a feeling he probably has 3-4 offers in hand already, all offering a similar per year average. It's a matter of preference at this point for him. He will get every bit of what is projected, probably more. And it won't be the Brewers or Twins. One of the big money teams will get him, tax or not. This is nothing shocking, it's business as usual.