Fear The Chorizo

Stefanski should be coach of the year...and that defense could carry them in the playoffs

If they want a washed up veteran quarterback, sure.

No, there isn't a realistic number that makes sense for the Brewers to offer Hader that he would actually sign and return as a free agent, where both sides would be happy with the contract terms. Frankly, I'm ok with not having a reliever signed to what will likely be a 9 figure contract to pitch into his mid-late 30s that pays him like he's going to remain an all-time great, when Hader has been fortunate to avoid significant arm injuries thus far in his career.

They also have a highly questionable quarterback situation heading into next year, and not the greatest salary cap situation when your best player (Jefferson) is likely to demand a WR market-setting contract in the offseason and their best lineman (Darrisaw) is also in line for a big payday to avoid holdouts/trade demands. Their GM has gotten mixed reviews - kudos for some adept free agent pickups and trades to add productive pieces to the roster, but his first couple of drafts are being widely panned despite having a bunch of picks to work with. The Vikes are a roster in limbo, and their arrow is either pointing sideways or down for the next few seasons because of it despite having what appears to be good coaches on both sides of the ball.

Statement win for the Ravens last night

It's because baseball is a young man's game more than ever, and organizations can continue churning out and cycling through good young and much cheaper players to put together winning clubs and avoid even playing in the marquee free agent sandbox that at this point really only includes a small handful of teams consistently. Well run organizations can establish a consistent mid-tier payroll and still win enough games to be in playoff contention every season, regardless of the division they play in. The expanded playoffs is a check on runaway huge market teams and their spending, because it doesn't let them just dictate regular season success into a ws shot with a small group of playoff teams. I for one dislike the expanded playoffs and its wonky format - but if mlb doesn't change the financial structure of the sport it's the only way to try and even out the playing field in terms of which teams win titles.

For as maddening as it is for the Dodgers to seemingly have anyone they want on their MLB team along with producing a steady stream of impact talent from their minor league system, it is really refreshing to know that besides a COVID-shortened season, they haven't won squat during this period when they make even the Yankees look poor.

Santana is a switch -hitting, really good defensive 1B that gives the roster a much-needed veteran presence, and he can still provide some pop hitting in the 5-7 range in the lineup of a good ballclub. Knowing he won't cost $15M plus a season for multiple years to sign, he makes alot of sense for the Brewers in 2024. If the team falls on its face, he'd also be a viable deadline trade candidate if the full fledged fire sale is on come July.

Because the website is run by a Twins fan and many key writers are Cub fans. I'm convinced many of these "articles" are geared towards intentional clickbait for regular posters on the Brewers/Twins/Cubs boards to wind up clicking all over the sites just to help with generating ad revenue. The Twins are looking to shed payroll - I really doubt they'd be interested in acquiring Burnes for 1 year at a similar cost to retaining Polanco, plus having to ship an actual package of legit prospect talent in order to do so. Much more likely they find a team to take what amounts to a salary dump trade in Polanco for a couple of low level minor league lotto tickets or young - pre arbitration OF. In that regard, the Brewers are actually a decent trade fit for Polanco....but not with sending Burnes to the Twins.

I hear this argument alot about not getting a good enough player or package back - I'm interested in specifically what you feel would be appropriate trade compensation for either Taylor or Houser based on their age, established roles as bottom of a MLB roster depth, years left of team control, and cost. Especially considering these guys are borderline non-tender candidates. With how the current arbitration process works, it's not just as simple as saying "so and so makes $10M a season after he signed a free agent deal to give you the same pitching value as Houser" without also adding the numerous pre arbitration or minor league free agent arms who provided equal to better value than Houser did on the mound last season, to the calculus, too (all who which would have much longer team control remaining). Same goes for Taylor, who was injured/terrible during the 1st half of last season and game back with a good two months of play to get his offensive numbers more in line with career averages - which are exactly that for a reserve OF....meh. The Brewers very likely got the best years of Taylor and Houser's careers given their ages playing for them in Milwaukee - these aren't the type of guys you want hanging around on your roster well into their 30s, good organizations have more talented and cheaper options to take their spots (or plan to acquire players from outside the organization to do so), and this appears to be the case in Milwaukee.

Well, Quero is on the 40 man roster...longterm I can see Contreras as a pretty darn good DH assuming Quero is in their longterm plans at catcher. Contreras is a decent defensive catcher, don't get me wrong - but by all accounts Quero is a stud defensively.

When you are going into the season with FOUR young outfielders all more than capable of playing CF along with the other OF positions, with one of them signed to an 8 year pre-mlb contract extension and just added to the 40 man roster, and your current franchise player based on contract size also will likely play more than half the time in LF, your 30 yr old 5th/6th OF on the 40 man roster is pretty much expendable, especially once he starts making more than league minimum as he works through salary arbitration. My mistake before thinking Taylor is further along in his years of MLB service time at 30 yrs old. At his age, it's alot more likely he'll get nontendered in the next offseason or two and maybe the Brewers can bring him back to be that super 4th OF again for a couple months a season.

Taylor also hit 0.160 in the first half of 2023.

The 40 man roster spots mean more to the Brewers at this point than the $...neither Taylor or Houser had options left and were in their 3rd year of salary arbitration = they've got the least amount of 40 man roster flexibility and team control remaining and they're much more expensive than other younger and more talented players who need to be on the field or on the mound in Milwaukee. As others have pointed out, freeing up both a chunk of payroll budget and roster spaces seems to indicate something else is in the works to go along with this move, too.

The Rays currently have the player they signed longterm to be their franchise player in legal jeopardy, who may not see the field again, they traded Adames after a down year in the first place that led many to believe he's a much better player than he actually is for arms that are either out of the organization or once again injured, and their current MLB pitching staff has more elbow problems than the Dodgers does. The Rays wish they were the Brewers right about now...

I would rather have the potential upside of young OFs taking Taylor's ABs and playing time this year, and the exact same thing could be said of Gasser taking Houser's innings for way less than $6m with the potential for him to also pitch better while developing at the MLB level. Just because this pair of 30 yr old backups were 1 year shy of free agency doesn't make them coveted assets for a team looking to improve talent on their mlb roster.

I know...fresh off a division title and lost in the playoffs to the team who got to the WS from the NL...just in bad shape

HighHeat got hired here?

I think the flip side of this trade is how Mets fans have to be feeling about Stearns continuing to stockpile guys that had permanently occupied the bottom of the Milwaukee Brewers MLB roster in recent seasons.

So you can use those expendable MLB assets to bring in a flyer of a prospect who you can stash and potentially get 6+ years of MLB control on, rather than pay roughly $8M in 2024 for bench players/swing arms on your roster.

This is a trade a team makes to free up 40 man roster space in order to add elsewhere on the roster via free agency (or add another prospect or two to it...Gasser? Black?). If the Brewers don't have plans of trading any of their other young OFs and want Chourio in Milwaukee to start the season, Taylor has no spot on this roster. Houser's best role has been that of a long man in the bullpen, and at the MLB level he's just a guy - you don't pay "just a guy" almost $6M in arbitration.

I'm with you on the comp pick possibility being an afterthought with Adames - if he stays a Brewer in 2024 I'm pulling for him to have a career season that resembles what he did for most of 2021, so he would consider not signing a QO from the Brewers....but not expecting it. The Giants make quite a bit of sense as a trade partner and I think any whiff of desperation on their end needing a SS may prompt them to offer up more than they should for Adames via trade.

When Melvin decided to hold onto Fielder, he traded the farm for Marcum and Grienke (both with two years of team control) Losing Cain stung, although that loss was pretty easily offset by the addition of Gomez in a future trade, but besides Cain the only other thing they lost was a knucklehead known more for his 40-hands photo than anything he did at the MLB level on the field and a slick fielding SS who never hit enough to miss him. Odorizzi also made a nice career for himself as a mid to bottom of the rotation starter, but the upside that Greinke brought to a Brewers team desperate for a TOR starter but good enough to win it all offensively was well worth sending over a handful of prospects. I don't think there's an obvious "only way" to approach Burnes this year for the overall longterm helath of the franchise - it's not a cut and dry "trade him no matter what" or "roll with him 1 more season before he leaves". The Brewers have the budget flexibility to play "wait and see", afford whatever arbitration salary Burnes will earn if they retain him through arbitration, and see how things shake out with any trade offers between now and the deadline. Given the current state of the NL Central, I think the Brewers would have to get a massive trade offer to move Burnes now - if it seems just like a fair deal, why not hold onto him into the season and then see how the Brewers start? If they're scuffling, they could get a "fair deal" a month or two into the season as well, particularly if a team obviously geared up to try and win it all has some significant pitching injuries in their rotation. The Dodgers and Rangers are already in that spot with arms that either won't be ready to start the season (DeGrom/Scherzer) or starters with extensive injury histories that could easily struggle early (Buehler, Glasnow, Kershaw, ...basically the entire Dodger rotation at this point).

Burnes has chosen to gamble on himself staying healthy in order to reach that huge free agent payday next offseason - at this point anything related to injury risk and his state of mind goes almost exclusively on his shoulders....not sure the Brewers should be too worried about a guy's desire to pitch like an ace during his free agent year. I've long looked at pitchers from the lens of how a small market team needs to prioritize getting value out of them through their mid-late twenties pitching for you, then determine the best way to find an off-ramp to avoid being saddled with a cumbersome, overpriced contract for an arm too far on the wrong side of 30 - even if it means sacrificing a few late 20's prime years by either letting him walk in free agency and getting a comp pick or trading him at the deadline. After the next few key agent starters sign elsewhere, there will be a couple teams interested in trading for Burnes before the season starts, and the question becomes if the trade packages offered are worth the Brewers trading him away, or if one more season with him anchoring a still solid pitching staff is more valuable to a roster that at present is still the best team in the division with Burnes on it. Trading Burnes in the offseason does get more return for him, but it also essentially punts on trying to be a true contender this year - which might not be the right plan for the rest of the roster. I'm a proponent of rolling with Burnes as the Brewers' 2024 Opening Day starter unless they get an incredibly valuable trade return, then if the Brewers are in playoff position come the trade deadline they add more via trade, otherwise if things don't get off to a great start the Brewers can get aggressive and get Burnes on the trade market well before July to still get a quality return. Reality is, at this point there are zero problems with keeping Burnes on the Brewers' roster to start 2024. If the Brewers turn around and resign Santana to play 1st and splurge on Soler to be their DH via free agency, suddenly their lineup looks alot more balanced. It really will be interesting to see what direction the Brewers will take things with a roster that already will have a bunch of young and exciting talent on it.

I'd add that I thought MLF did a pretty good job of hiring his initial offensive staff - however after several key coordinators/coaches left for head coaching/promotional coordinating gigs, I think much of the promotion from within hasn't been as solid...but it's tough to tell. MLF hiring Barry after canning Pettine has been a failure with how many draft picks and free agent signings have been made for the defense every single offseason. I can see the pros-cons of waiting until the offseason to fire Barry, but then again the same thing could've been said after last season ended and nothing happened. The defense should have been the strength of this year's team given the roster and just how young the offense was after moving on from #12....instead, it's just more of the same, where if the defense had performed up to expectations this team may have given the Lions a run for the division despite a rocky start to the year.