bill hAll Star
-
Posts
2,852 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by bill hAll Star
-
Perhaps it is ... but that doesn't change the fact that the team has decided that it is a contender, and Stearns is going to construct the roster with that in mind, whether we like it or not. Pitching acquisitions are going to happen, very likely in the next couple weeks. Instead of arguing whether they should happen, which probably isn't feasible at this point, we should be arguing who they will be. Something may happen, but if the demands are relatively high on Archer, it'll be something like Santana for Salazar with something else thrown in to even it out. I'd be fine with that.
-
If the team signs Arietta or Cobb, they surrender their 4th rounder ... the round Burnes was drafted in two years ago. That's on top of the $100+ million contract. So free agency is not the be all/end all either. I think they will probably sign a free agent (losing that pick) and make a trade (losing a haul of prospects), and posters here will be upset about both. But it will position this team to be a contender for the next 4 years, which is why you have a farm system. I am OK punting a single draft pick. I am not OK punting everything on the farm for a team that I can't say with certainty will win a division in the next few years if an Archer trade. I'm not on the Fangraphs 77 win bandwagon pessimism level but I also think people are a tad bit optimistic on being contenders with Archer. If they add a free agent on top of that, I'd get on board...but that's a lot. For me, I know that salary could get a bit tight in 2020 or so, but I'm all for overpaying a free agent. If some things fail, we have the optimism of Burnes and others coming up. If we trade for Archer and things don't go right, we're looking at a looooooong way to go before things can get better.
-
It has been pretty firmly established by multiple sources that "stand pat" is not an option whatsoever, so advocating for that is a fools errand. Obviously Stearns sees a need to strengthen the rotation, and he will find some way to do it. It's a matter of who they get, and what they give up. Some also think that getting desperate to empty out everything else we've built to potentially raise a 2nd place banner (yes, we'd be in the mix) is also a fool's errand.
-
Also, I misread a bit of what CHL21 said, but it is my next point: We wouldn't be looking at trading for all of these pitchers if we developed our own starters. We are finally at the point of developing our own pipeline of pitchers (or acquiring them relatively cheaply in trades like Davies and Anderson). The only way the Brewers are going to consistently win is if Archer works out perfectly (does not regress/have hard contact issues) or if the Brewers finally develop their own consistent pitching. Something that will not happen yet again for a long time if they empty the farm for Archer.
-
Ok, throw out another option that the team can trade for and throw in as the #1 or #2 in their rotation. Overpay a free agent. Keep the guys in our system. Let the #1s or #2s actually come from our own system someday.
-
Prospects can be overrated a lot. I think the Yelich trade may be close to a win 5 years from now. However, if you’re a small market, saying that about every possible trade will be a losing effort over the years.
-
Right, and I'm just saying that unless Archer's cost is considerably lower to trade for than we know, I'd rather spend the extra ~$10 million/year on a free agent or bring in a salary dump. I think Archer could be fine, but I think there are better ways to keep organizational depth and/or MLB depth by keeping the prospects. If the Brewers miss out on free agency, I hope they do not get desperate and empty the farm for Archer. I like him. He's fine. He's not Chris Sale and there are some red flags with Archer as well.
-
Honest question: how many guys throw 95 MPH their whole career? How many guys throw hard sliders their whole career and 95 MPH that don't slow down or get Tommy John? I realize that Archer is only 29, but there's a real possibility that his arm starts to deteriorate in the near future. Cost absolutely factors in for me. Everyone can get excited about Archer only making $7 million instead of Lynn getting $17 for instance, but you also have to factor in that you are giving up Burnes, who, (I realize this is also a risk) will essentially come up with a 6 year, $20 million contract if he performs well. Which is why signing most any pitcher to anything more than a 3 year deal is insane in the days of ultra high rpm pitching. Still I think we all know the Brewers are in go for it mode so expect a whale of a move for a TOR guy. So you're going to put all of your eggs in the basket of a guy you are admitting these issues with... If Archer is hurt or ineffective, kiss the next 5 years goodbye. You've traded half of your farm system for him. If you sign Lance Lynn and he's terrible on arrival, you still have hope of Corbin Burnes coming up and turning into a TOR pitcher next year. I'm a huge proponent of free agency over gutting our entire farm for a guy that may or may not be an ace. I personally don't even care if in theory we sign Arrieta and he's terrible for the final 2 years of his 5 year contract. There's a good chance that the guys we didn't trade for Archer will come up and provide value.
-
Honest question: how many guys throw 95 MPH their whole career? How many guys throw hard sliders their whole career and 95 MPH that don't slow down or get Tommy John? I realize that Archer is only 29, but there's a real possibility that his arm starts to deteriorate in the near future. Cost absolutely factors in for me. Everyone can get excited about Archer only making $7 million instead of Lynn getting $17 for instance, but you also have to factor in that you are giving up Burnes, who, (I realize this is also a risk) will essentially come up with a 6 year, $20 million contract if he performs well.
-
Illinois has higher state taxes, a 3ish% difference in state tax on say $140 million is substantial. If you went to the Cubs board you'd see they think Darvish is going to sign with them for 4/$90...LOL. $120-130 is probably the low end of what he might get. Actually...no. A 3% difference(I went 7%/10%) is an incredible $2mil difference on $70mil. Only half his contract is made in Chicago/Milwaukee. On top of that, if this was truly the breaking point for Darvish, the Cubs would probably bump their offer up by a million or two to basically make it even. I can't imagine that being the difference. Florida vs. California, yes, I could see that.
-
$3 million is going to stop the Red Sox from making a splash move? Yep: https://bosoxinjection.com/2017/11/03/red-sox-2018-payroll-update/ Heck, if the Dodgers are worried about it, the Red Sox are. I'm not following here. The Red Sox were hoping to be about $3 million over the threshold and now they're $6 million instead because of the Betts news. Say the Braun rumor was true: Either they're taking Braun knowing that they're going way over the threshold again and will live with it...or they're sending something back to offset salaries and Braun's money minus the offset money (Hanley Ramirez or some combo of players (again, unrealistic)) will keep them under the threshold. I don't know why Betts' $3 million that they had to be planning for would change their outlook on this.
-
deGrom is more valuable than Archer, IMO. We'd have to empty the majority of our farm system around Santana in a trade (if the Mets would want Santana, which you noted doesn't make a ton of sense).
-
Well, they just lost their arb hearing with Betts, so they are shelling out an extra $3 million there. I imagine that would remove them from any interest in Braun (if he'd even accept a trade there). I think Santana makes sense there, though. $3 million is going to stop the Red Sox from making a splash move?
-
Well, I tend to agree with the ERA going down, but you do also have to factor in Miller Park vs. the Trop, which softens the good parts of his change of scenery.
-
I brought it up further back, but you also have to be a little bit concerned with a pitcher that throws a lot of sliders and hasn't had an arm injury yet that his time may be coming...right in the middle of your "all in" window. Even if Archer remains healthy but his arm breaks down a little bit and he goes from 95 to 92-93 and his slider isn't as hard of a slider, I don't think he's the type of pitcher that will easily adapt to being an average velocity pitcher.
-
I think in your theory here on 2019, you probably can hold on to Thames/Chacin (they wouldn't sign Chacin to an affordable deal only to trade him away unless something really interesting came up), but you may have to non-tender Vogt, Perez, Villar as all may cost too much for their role in arbitration. Shaw is only in arby 1 in 2019, so he probably is only going to get like $4 million.
-
I had mentioned it on other threads that brought up Herrera, but there were several stretches where Herrera reported lack of feeling in his forearm/fingers/hand and had to get pulled from a game after walking several batters. Are we willing to take the risk?
-
You could get close to enough ABs in for everyone if Braun is a platoon 1B and still gets some OF. It would mean Aguilar is gone, though.
-
Where is Domingo Going?
bill hAll Star replied to Warning Track Power's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
But Stearns acquired Brinson and Diaz and we don't know that Brinson is a high strikeout player. It's not that he'd be completely against acquiring/using them. If the Brinson package was the best he could get for Lucroy a while back, he took it hoping that A. Brinson could shake the Ks in the minors or B. he could deal him later, I'd imagine. Or if you have a really good player like Santana it's not like he'd be completely against keeping him. Just prefers to get other types if at all possible. -
Where is Domingo Going?
bill hAll Star replied to Warning Track Power's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
Thanks for all the insider info HH19! As for your speculation on Moustakas, here I hope you're wrong. While he doesn't strikeout a ton, he doesn't walk a bunch either. Furthermore, I hope we don't get too crazy about overturning an 86 win team and lose the camaraderie developed in 2017 ala the Padres of a few years back with Kemp, Upton and Kimbrel. That Kemp/Upton/Kimbrel (and Norris) offseason was silly from the Padres. I'm a pessimist of sorts on the current Brewers flipping, but the Padres went into the season with Middlebrooks, Norris, and Upton as everyday players - none of which could cross the .700 OPS mark hitting right-handed pitching. That was a horribly planned transformation. No platoon mates and a bunch of guys that could only hit lefties. That team was doomed from day 1. I like Cain and Yelich as players and potentially other moves - as long as they don't empty out more of their farm for it. -
Because they aren't going to go into the season with Yelich, Cain, Braun, Santana, Phillips and Broxton in the OF. Broxton will be gone. Braun can play 1B if they really have to. It's not perfect and should be fixed, but they can make do, I guess.
-
No, this is somewhat what I've been debating the whole time. I'd prefer to sign one via free agency and ship Santana off for a more "even" deal or maybe even prospects.
-
Where is Domingo Going?
bill hAll Star replied to Warning Track Power's topic in Transaction Rumors & Proposals
He's apparently a very bad defensive 2B, but it's a reasonable idea still. -
Is a team headlined by Chris Archer, Christian Yelich, and Lorenzo Cain a World Series contender? I think they'll be in the mix for the playoffs, but Cain is only going to decline during his contract (and I was happy with signing him). You've put all of your eggs in the basket of a group of solid/good players winning it for you in the next 4 years if you deal for Archer. It's not that they'll have zero prospects left, but other than maybe Hiura or something, they'll have nothing left in the farm that will make a drastic impact in the next 5 years and they won't have much salary room to do anything substantial in free agency. This will be it. They can obviously shuffle with trades, but there won't be many more big splash improvements on the horizon after this offseason. It's win now for about 4 years, but I think if it's not going well in the next 2, they'll either have to re-up their last group of prospects to go all in again or completely reshuffle the deck with more trades.
-
Here was my plan: 1. Let all the prospects come up and see which ones fit. 2. Use excess money from having so many minimum salary and early abitration players on free agents. 3. After 2018, use spectacular depth to have a 10 year window of good teams a la the Cardinals for the past 20. 4. If truly in it at the deadline in a particular year, trade for rentals. 5. Sell some guys in trades later in their prime if you have depth behind to continually replenish the farm. I’m only worried about the Cubs this year and next. They may be good after that but I just think (especially if they get Darvish), that we had a lot of work to do to catch them short-term. I’m not saying perpetually wait. I think there could’ve been a long window opened up after this year, and I’d have been totally OK with signing free agents in this offseason to take a shot at it as well in 2018, even knowing it might be one more year before the odds for better.
