Harold Hutchison

I personally agree with your $150 million number, but again not every year. The Brewers would probably lose money if they had that payroll and won 72 games, whereas they'd probably have a bit of a profit margin if they won 98 games and made the NLCS again. Again, this is all opinion. Or that extra $30 million could be used to invest in the farm system and/or scouting - and best to do that investing when the team is relatively successful and has the revenue to spare, instead of needing to do it later.

One other thing... Jeffress has done well with the Brewers, but struggled with other teams. Other GMs may figure he's a Milwaukee Miracle. Knebel, on the other hand... is likely to be seen as someone who could replicate success elsewhere.

I think that the first MLB team to offer its minor-league player REAL money in terms of salary... like three or four times what players in MiLB currently make... is going to start cleaning up big. Plus, maybe they also go beyond college, but also trade school. I recently saw an ad in my local paper saying a HAZMAT driver could get up to $125K a year for this one company.

Jeremy Jeffress entering the game has usually meant lights out for the opposing team, especially as a Brewer. In 2018, this was particularly so. He was fourth on the team with 3.4 WAR, had 15 saves, and posted a 1.29 ERA. He racked up 10.4 strikeour per nine innings, and he had the third-lowest WHIP (0.991 - only Josh Hader and Gio Gonzalez had better ones). During his MLB career, he's had three stints in Milwaukee. One in 2010 (he was part of the trade that brought Zach Greinke to Milwaukee in the 2010-2011 offseason), one from the middle of 2014 to the middle of 2016 (he was part of the deal that brought Brinson, Ortiz, and Cordell to Milwaukee - and thus part of the packages for Yelich and Schoop), and one from the middle of 2017 to the present. In Milwaukee, he's been lights out - a 2.17 ERA, 42 out of 43 career saves, and 21 put of 25 career wins. Elsewhere, it's a 4.76 ERA. In 2018, he did struggle a little in the post-season, but what he did in the regular season got Milwaukee a division title. He has a team option in 2020 for $4.3 million - his age 32 season. He is getting $3.175 million in 2019 - his age 31 season - from an exercised team option. So, should the Brewers go multi-year on an extension with Jeremy Jeffress past 2020? In this case, given the fact he has dominated throughout his tenure with the Crew, I vote yes, with a deal like this: Signing bonus: $4 million 2021: $6 million 2022: $7 million 2023: $7 million 2024: $8 million 2025: Player option $6 million/Team option $8 million/Buyout: $2 million Full no-trade clause. Total: Ranges from four years, $32 million (with a $2 million buyout) to five years, $40 million. What do you all think? Should the Crew extend Jeffress?

Here's the last three years of Moustakas: 2016: Missed over 80% of the season, albeit an .801 OPS in the 27 games he did play. 2017: Monster season with 38 HR, but only a .314 OBP. 2018: Healthy season, but OPS dropped 61 points from 2017. I'm not sure I'd offer him a deal on the order of $16.6 million a season with that history. Maybe three years at $11 million a season. He's struggled against lefties in the past, has trouble with power pitchers, and his OBP skills are not that good.

Not having to face DHs would help Shields... makes for an interesting buy-low candidate. One year, $4 million with a team option for 2020 at $5 million or buyout of $1.5 million.

Youd be very wrong to use the word "cheap" for any reason next time. JJ has pitched very well for Milwaukee, and I'm probably gonna do a Jeremy Jeffress post in my "To Extend or Not Extend" in the next couple of days...

I know youre wrong. I also know everything you wrote does NOT excuse collusion. Okay, let's assume you're Bryce Harper's agent, and I'm a GM. One question I would ask you is, "Why should I tell the owner of this team that we should pay Bryce Harper $35 million a year for the next ten years when he has missed at least a quarter of the season in three of the seven years he has played major league baseball?" What's the answer?

I agree... owners have colluded in the past. But also, any owner of GM who looks at how the Pujols/Fielder/A-Rod contracts went south, probably came up with the decision on their own not to go past a certain length or a certain average value. They probably looked at the changes occurring in baseball over the last decade-plus (sabremetrics, the Brewers use of the pitching staff, and defensive positioning/shifts), and did so on their own. The players, especially those that never make a 40-man roster or the majors, are being shafted. But teams in smaller markets are also getting shafted, too. The majority of major-league clubs that really have become at-large AAAA affiliates for teams in very huge markets - and we know which is which. Baseball needs to find a way to get players more compensation, but they also need to ensure that small-market teams can also compete. I think that the minor-league salaries should be bumped up pretty high ($60,000 for rookie league, $75K for A, $90K for A+, $120K for AA, $150K for AAA). Maybe it is time to go from 40-man rosters and 25-man active rosters to a 50-man roster and a 30-man active roster. I don't have answers to all of that. But casting aspersions will only delay fixing the problems.

It's five years... buying out two years of FA, but it includes two team options. I modeled it somewhat on Chase Anderson's deal.

I do not doubt that collusion happened in the past - and it was wrong then. But how much of today's free marker is collusion, how much is coming from changes in baseball, how much is the fact that sabremetrics has changed the way teams are put together, how much is it because some past long-term deals went south, and how much is simply because of other factors? I think the jury is out. The game of baseball is changing - and that is changing how baseball teams might value some players. Look at what the Brewers did with their pitching staff in 2018. Do you think they'd pay $25 or $30 million a year for an ace? Similarly, what they did with their defensive positioning and shifts is going to lead (down the road) to more teams seeking spray hitters as opposed to pull hitters. Sabremetrics has also caused changes. Teams may not be willing to spend $25 million a year for a hitter when they can get close to that performance for $10 million a year between two players - and then they have money left over for other needs. When they introduced sabremetrics, the market changed. Some teams may be looking for a way to score runs without having to pay the big bucks. And some long-term deals went south. Look at Albert Pujols. The Angels sign him for ten years and $240 million - and he hasn't posted an OPS higher then .800 since 2012. The next three years, the Angels owe him $87 million. That's money that could have gone to another player, but also... do you think that the Angels will want to sign another 10-year deal like that in the future? Look at Prince Fielder... had a career-ending injury in 2016, was released after 2017, and the Rangers still owe him $24 million a year through 2020. A-Rod also was released - and cost $21 million a year in 2017. Bryce Harper's difficulties in getting that huge deal are probably stemming from the way the Pujols and Fielder contracts went south. Any smart GM or owner would look at that and say, "Okay, I'll be more careful about length and/or the amount of money." The Brewers have their own history with this, with Braun's thumb injury, and the Jeffrey Hammonds/Jeff Suppan/Matt Garza/Randy Wolf contracts. In the case of Garza, they paid $12.5 million a year from 2015-2017 for performance they could have gotten from Taylor Jungmann for a lot less. Then there are other factors. Manny Machado's conduct during the 2018 post-season probably has teams shying away from paying his asking price. He might bring offensive performance, but there are now some big negatives as well. Before making a huge offer, any GM or owner will want a lot of due diligence. And what come up when teams do what is done as part of that due diligence may alter how much they will offer over how long, or even if they make an offer at all. I think it says a lot that the Dodgers didn't seem to seriously try to bring Machado back, or that the Yankees have decided to pass on Machado and go with Tulo as a stopgap. If I had to make a guess, I'd say the big reasons for the current stage of free agency is primarily between sabremetrics and changes in the game. Those changes are making it more likely that a big contract could go south and cripple a team's future options, and no GM would want to do that. I don't think it's collusion... I think people have realized that sabremetrics and other things are changing the game, and they don't want to be caught wrong-footed with a big contract.

He's the mayor of Ding-Dong City. He's been a reliable power bat for the last two seasons, and came via trade after the 2016 season. Travis Shaw's posted a .258 avg/.347 OBP/.497 SLG/.844 OPS line for Milwaukee over the last two years. He's totaled 63 homers in that timeframe, and played well at third base, second base, and first base. With the Red Sox, he saw limited action in left field. In other words, he is a very good hitter, with more positional flexibility than many Brewers fans (and management) expected when he was acquired in the 2016-2017 offseason. He's also been quite consistent in terms of home run production, and his OBP skills improved from 2017 to 2018. Now, he plays a position where the Brewers have a solid prospect in Lucas Erceg, who's flashing power, but who's also struggled to consistently hit for average. For 2019, Shaw is slated to get $4.68 million at age 29. He is due to be a free agent after 2022. So, should the Brewers go multi-year with Travis Shaw on an extension? Given Erceg's status, and Shaw as a more known quantity, my vote is yes, with a deal like this: Signing bonus: $6 million 2020: $6.5 million 2021: $6.5 million 2022: $7.5 million 2023: $7.5 million 2024: $10 million 2025: $2 million buyout or $10 million team option. 2026: $1 million buyout or $10 million team option. Total: five years, $44 million, could go to seven years, $64 million. What do you think about Travis Shaw? Extend the Mayor of Ding-Dong City, or Don't Extend?

On the one hand, the revamped arsenal is something to keep in mind. The sabremetrics say one thing, the results say another - which is it? Between the injury history and the fact you have that huge disparity between the sabremetrics and actual results, I would have made Miley an offer, likely for one year, but with a couple of team options, ala Chase Anderson.

This is precisely how the Brewers need to operate in order to remain competitive. Lifelong Brewers like Braun need to be a dying breed if we want the Brewers to continually be relevant. It will be hard, as I am as guilty as anyone with romanticizing the lifelong Brewer. However, I would rather see consistently winning baseball in Milwaukee. Braun is really the wrong choice of a person to drive your point home. If not for the HGH/injury issues, he's exactly the type of generational player that you specifically do keep and try to build around. Weeks, Hart, Fielder, Knebel, Scooter, Khris Davis, etc...all very very good players in their prime, but there is a good reason in each case for those guys to not be extended into their mid-late 30s as a lifelong brewer. Spoiler alert, but Yelich might be the type of player we try to extend if possible...though if/when he wants $35 million per year we'll probably have to let him go to LA. The big question is whether they want to be life-long Brewers. If they do, work out the extension. If not...

Corey Knebel has been an outstanding relief option for the Brewers the last two years, totaling 55 saves and a 2.54 ERA. Much of that was a dominant 2017, where his ERA was 1.76, and he posted 39 of those saves. In 2018, he was injured, and was a little untracked, but he soon returned to form. In fact, his K/BB ratio improved from 2017 (3.15) to 2018 (4.00). Both seasons was a K/9 of over 14. In short, when Knebel's in, hitters will strike out. So, is it time to think about an extension? Knebel is arbitration-eligible in 2020, and a free agent after 2022. He has his age 27 season in 2019, where he will earn $5.13 million. His past performance, while no guarantee of future production, certainly points to him being highly valuable in the Brewers' bullpen. But an extension for Knebel will likely still be expensive. In the wake of the 2017 season, I pushed for giving Knebel a four-year, $18 million extension. Since then, I am still in favor of it, albeit it will be larger than earlier. I'd propose going for five years: Bonus: $1.5 million 2020: $5.5 million 2021: $5.5 million 2022: $6 million 2023: $6.5 million 2024: $7.5 million Total: Five years, $32.5 million. What do you think with regards to Knebel, extend, or don't extend?

I would like to see Perez play catcher sometime. Has a Brewer ever played all nine positions on the field, then been a DH, PH, and PR? If not... Perez could be the first. When I say the Crew should extend Perez, it's because that even though the traditional five tools are average or below average, his versatility is an 80 on the 20-80 scale now that he seems to be adding catcher to the other eight positions he's played.

I'm okay with a Chacin, Woodruff, Peralta, Burnes, Anderson rotation... they're the five healthiest guys. Nelson and Davies missed a lot of time, and have the options to have them start in San Antonio to get back into the routine.

Gilbert Lara was traded with KJ Harrison to get Gio Gonzalez.

People would change things to lessen discomfort. How many times does a player swing a bat in the course of a season, between game action (making contact, swinging and missing, fouling stuff off, warming up in the on-deck circle), batting practice, and spring training? Probably well over a thousand. Here's hoping he gets his swing back to a better place.

No problem. I wonder if his thumb injury did cause him to change his swing a little - subtly enough that the launch angle did decrease somewhat - and then the injuries in 2017 added a few more changes, which turned what would have been doubles into outs, and homers into doubles. If ten of the loud outs were doubles that got taken away, his .254 average goes to .279, the OBP goes from .313 to .333, and the SLG goes from .469 to .518. So, I think that the right adjustments could provide quite a boost for Braun.

Don't want to hijack the thread, especially given the blue text...but isn't it generally accepted that Ryan was using something strictly during the late summer of the 2011 season, in order to heal quickly for the 2011 post-season? I'm generally apathetic towards PED use anyways, so I largely don't care about Braun or McGwire or anybody who has used. Just thought it was generally accepted that Braun had clean tests before and after and only used during some later months in 2011. We know he consulted with Biogenesis... and MLB used that to justify re-imposing his suspension, and then tacking on some extra time. It stank to high heaven. But the test sample was mishandled, per the arbitration ruling. Apparently, Braun's team replicated it. It speaks volumes that the arbitrator who ruled in favor of Braun citing the mishandling of the sample was fired AND that MLB and the MLBPA made changes to the procedures.

The Cubs' window ended in 2018. The only question is if 2019 will be bad enough to break any denial on their part. I detest Chicago teams as much as any red-blooded Milwaukee-born ought to, but statements like this just make me laugh. They tied us for the division a year ago. While I agree they’re not 100-win material, they ain’t going anywhere for a little while. The window is wide-open for both them, us and the Cardinals. And the Reds are at least in the same room as the window for the first time in a few years. The Pirates could be, but they’d rather live in a windowless, furnished apartment because it’s cheaper. Between age, injuries, a crappy farm system, and drama, I don't see the Cubs as any better, and likely to be a whole lot worse. Quintana is their best pitcher, and after that, it's pray the pitcher in question keeps it together. I think the Cubs are an 80-85 win team. Worth respecting, but on the downward trajectory. They're too good to get the pieces they need to rebuild properly via the draft, and right now, too many of their pieces are overpriced and old. I expect that by 2020, they will crater.

So 35-year-old John Lester and 35-year-old Cole Hamels are not candidates to regress, the loss of Justin Wilson from the bullpen will have no impact, Brandon Morrow's and Yu Darvish's elbows are certain to recover, Addison Russell's 40 game suspension will have no impact and he won't be a distraction when he returns, 38-year-old Ben Zobrist isn't a candidate for regression, Baez isn't a candidate for regression... The Cubs have as many question marks as the Brewers, if not more. The Cubs' window ended in 2018. The only question is if 2019 will be bad enough to break any denial on their part. For the Crew's sake, I hope it is not. I think they're in the 80-85 win range - not enough to beat the Brewers, but decent enough that maybe Theo Epstein will spend more on free agents and try to make some deadline deals...

I'd argue that if you get to a point where you have to DFA players and expose them to waivers, you had too much.

With Nelson, it's simply a matter of he's missed enough time that he has to have rust - rust that spring training alone might not be able to shake off. Having him at San Antonio lets him shake off that rust (good for him) while not impacting the big-league club (good for the Crew). Ditto for Davies, who missed about 60% of his starts in 2018. Maybe they can build up enough value for a trade in that timeframe. If the Crew gets Keuchel, I figure Wilkerson gets outrighted or Albers is released. Hiura probably replaces the other. A Keuchel, Chacin, Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta rotation wouldn't be a bad one, IMO. Anderson and Houser are the two arms I'd look at moving for some prospects.