bill hAll Star

It's interesting that you mention depth at the pitching position on the top section to knock down fans who believe the Cubs are in a difficult position but all the players you list on the bottom are all position players you expect to take a jump. Maybe try showing the pitching depth that we are supposed to be scared of if you really want to try making a point. Right, they don't have much for pitching depth and I doubt they have another year where 5 starting pitchers get them through the season. And the pitching that they have(without Darvish) isn't the type of pitching you see winning in October. Arrieta and Davis are gone and Lester is getting older/less effective. And unless Hendricks regains some velocity, teams are going to figure out how to hit his mid 80s garbage. Quintana is the most sure thing they have, but his arm has a lot of miles on it. Maybe he'll be like Verlander or Sabathia where they can pile on basically unlimited innings without significantly regressing, but those guys are the exception not the rule. I'm sure all the cubs starters are projected favorably with shiny WAR numbers that people love so much, but fangraphs is notoriously terrible at projecting regression in older players and at projecting improvement in young players. That's why I say they are built to win in the regular season but not in the post season. They have tons of upside on the offensive side, but not so much on the pitching front. Good hitting beats good pitching, but great pitching beats great hitting. I don't see the Brewers' current rotation or the Cards' rotation as anything that would strike fear in the Cubs, especially with Darvish supposedly being a Cub (if not, they probably end up with someone like Cobb). I think that's what this is all about. If you want to say that the Cubs are not likely to get past the Dodgers or Nats, I won't disagree with you. Also, you kinda just proved the whole point about the overdone doom-and-gloom over the Cubs on this forum/thread. You're entitled to your opinion, but the Brewers have a lot of similar warts to deal with if not everything goes right. I'm on board with the Brewers being at the point where the Cubs maybe getting knocked down to mid-high 80s in wins if an injury occurs, but I'm not willing to push my chips in and build a season that is dependent on the Cubs having a multitude of injuries. Not much changed with Lester last year peripherally other than the ball going out of the yard more often than it usually did on him and a bad LOB%. Maybe more homers is a trend, but Lester might have also been a bad luck guy last year as well. He's getting older, but he very well might produce a low-mid 3s ERA next year.

It's interesting that you mention depth at the pitching position on the top section to knock down fans who believe the Cubs are in a difficult position but all the players you list on the bottom are all position players you expect to take a jump. Maybe try showing the pitching depth that we are supposed to be scared of if you really want to try making a point. I'm not suggesting they have great pitching depth, but they've got enough resources to get by without it for the time being. Those guys don't even have to take a jump. They just have to play all year. If they sign Darvish, they could have some things go wrong and still win 90-95 games like last year. They had a lot of early season struggles and still comfortably beat us.

No, you don't have that right. Schwarber and Russell DID regress. Santana, Shaw etc...have NOT regressed as of yet. From the start of June on, Schwarber was one of the better power hitters in baseball. .250/.335/.560 with 17 HR. It's true that maybe he isn't totally wanted right now, but he could still be very valuable for the Cubs, even with neutral/bad/terrible defense (depends what you read/want to believe). I guess I'm just reading a lot of wishful thinking pieces on the Cubs not having the organizational or pitching depth to get it done while people are ready to blindly believe the Brewers still have an 85 win team and that adding a good player is gonna do it. I dunno, there just seems to be a lot of pessimism on the Cubs from a few posters and I think they're not factoring the $ still to spend, guys like Schwarber continuing to develop, or Happ/Contreras blossoming more or being full contributors in a full season.

When Cubs are discussed: "They're in bad shape. Nobody wants their (slightly) regressed players and they are running out of money to spend." When Brewers are discussed: "Everything's gonna be great. We aren't going to have any regressions." Do I have that right?

I think that is a big overpay on the Brewers' end. Castro's contract almost gives him negative value, and Yelich and Realmuto have asked to be traded, reducing the Marlins' leverage. I would be more inclined to say Yelich/Realmuto/Castro for Arcia/Pina and maybe Broxton or a lower-level prospect like Supak or Ponce. Major league players carry a much higher value than prospects. Castro's owed just under $23M over the next two years. For a 1-2 WAR, maybe even 3, 28 year old that's almost chump change in todays' game. And it's only for 2 years. Exactly. Plus, I don’t know how much the contract stings when the roster is mostly a finished product. Not many places to worry about filling and needing $.

Chicks dig the long ball? If he's comparing him to Escobar, and the ball is juiced, why didn't Alcides have a jump in his homers and slugging as well? Oh, because it doesn't fit his agenda. Because Alcides is washed up. I'm not sure if you're joking here but homers just went from 20 year lows in 2013/2014 (basically 2010-2015 was a lull once steroids were curtailed) to the 4th (2016) and 1st (2017) highest HR/game averages in MLB history basically overnight.

So you're of the opinion that the ball wasn't juiced this year despite several articles being written on it? Or if it's not juiced, the feel is different, which obviously impacts pitchers. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/baseballs-are-more-consistently-juiced-than-ever/ https://sports.yahoo.com/world-series-players-concerns-slick-juiced-baseballs-continue-prior-game-5-012645244.html https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2017/10/30/16570142/world-series-mlb-baseballs-juiced-slick-homers https://www.theringer.com/2017/6/14/16044264/2017-mlb-home-run-spike-juiced-ball-testing-reveal-155cd21108bc https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2017/06/29/mlb-juiced-ball-home-runs/440203001/ http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/open-letter-mlb-commissioner-rob-manfred-juiced-balls/ That's literally the first page of a google search. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the idea that these athletes are bigger, stronger and more highly conditioned than they were even 10 years ago. Uhhh, yeah, I think when basically every monthly HR record was getting shattered every subsequent month over the past ~2 years should tell us something.

You literally said it. 100 losses, scorched earth, top 3 at minimum draft picks, huge bonus pools. Is it guaranteed to work? No. But at least I'm giving myself a shot at 5-8 WAR players making nothing (relatively) for the first few years of their careers so I don't have to go out and trade all of my prospects to get these guys. I said it last night. After the 27th out was made in game 162 I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Anderson, probably not Nelson because he's hurt and has no value, maybe Davies etc. Doesn't mean I'd trade them but if I was blown away with an offer, you bet I would take it. I think they all overachieved last year and are due for regression and they're not really core players anyways, so you can always flip guys like that for prospects and have other prospects fill their spots. So this team isn't built to compete as currently constituted and the Brewers should continue to stack prospects? What about the 40 man roster crunch? What about rushing players to MLB when they aren't ready, impacting development? While I understand the idea of regression when does simple maturation in the case of Shaw, Anderson, Santana and Davies occur and not have it be a career year? What happens if they all replicate 2017? Doesn't that make their value even more in 2019? I think that the prospect 40 man crunch is overblown. Given the reality that we aren't going scorched earth, I'll give my take: I'd play it safer for the next 2 years and only sign free agents. If we're ahead of the Cubs near a trade deadline, I'd trade for a rental. If the Brewers trade for Yelich, they'd better be sure that they can overtake the Cubs in the next 2-3 years or it wouldn't have been worth it (and yes, before 20 people jump in, I do know that Yelich has 5 years of control). I understand the sentiment that the Cubs could be every bit as strong for 5 years instead of 2 and at some point you need to take a shot, but Stearns/Attanasio need to be pretty certain that they can make the jump right now if they're going to make this move or we might be sitting on another decade of no playoff appearances. I personally think that Yelich is a great player and 5 years of player control is wonderful and I also even think that some of our prospects may be overrated! But I don't think that the Brewers are a Yelich away from winning the division this year. So then the choice is to keep shoveling prospects on to the fire to try to beat the Cubs or to just pray that everything falls into place in the next year or two. And when we eventually do not do that, we'll be ready for another semi or full teardown in 2021 or 2022. If you go with Yelich and/or Archer, you are declaring that 2018 and 2019 are the years. Sure, you've got those two guys somewhat in their primes for 2020 and 2021, but at that point, I'd have hoped that the giant haul of prospects that I gave up can provide as much value as those guys are. And maybe all of the guys we trade will be duds...but as we saw with the Royals, the other teams have professional evaluators and generally take good players from us.

Just saying I wouldn't be all that upset if we traded him. Right...we all have our own opinions of players and those are all valid. Ortiz could be a throw-in that the Brewers force or the Marlins just begrudgingly take even if both or one staff don't think he's as good as hyped. However, if he is the 2nd or 3rd best piece in the trade, most likely, the Marlins' brass thinks he could be really good. Your guys' take that he could be a bust is warranted, but the Marlins' professional baseball evaluation team would think highly enough of him to put him as the 2nd piece in a trade for their extremely valuable trade chip.

Great, now we just need the Marlins' professional evaluation staff to not think Ortiz is overrated.

But if Miami moves Chen, they can now buy any/everyone next year if they want with only minimum/near minimum contracts. Miami doesn't want to buy everyone and anyone next year. They want to tank and maybe do some Villar/Chris Carter 2016-type Brewers projects. They'll have plenty of money to go and sign a few 1 year risks hoping to flip guys even with Chen on their roster.

Realmuto too? Regardless of if you take on Chen's salary, you are probably adding two more premium prospects. He is 26, and on a minimum salary. I can't think of a motivation the marlins would have to move him, which means you are looking at a major overpay. At least Yelich has requested a trade, which takes away a little of the Marlins' leverage. Realmuto publicly requested a trade too, and while he's still cheap he's entering his arbitration years. It doesn't make rational sense for the Marlins to trade him, although it seems unlikely they are competitive by the time he's a FA, but never underestimate their willingness to unload quality players to save money (in this case Chen's remaining $50+M) The Marlins have stated that they're out of cost-cutting mode. I think they'll just let Chen's contract rot unless somebody really sweetens the pot with an offer to take that contract off their hands. Their payroll is probably going to be like $85 million (without Yelich) this year and then Chen + 24 pre-arby/arby players over the next 3 years. They'll probably just let it rot because they can live with 2 or 3 $40-50 million payrolls. They could also see if Chen can come back and generate any trade buzz in 2018 or 2019 with a decent performance.

It says "+'22 option" in the detail part of the spreadsheet but doesn't have anything marked in the '22 column. It's there, just not accurately reflected in the columns.

And everyone else wants to hang a banner of "we had an All Star outfielder and only lost the division by 7 games for a few years." I can play that game, too. I get that there is risk in continuing to let the prospects go and finding out in 3 years that it's still an 80 win team, but this could start a chain of moves that makes us a 2nd place team for 3-4 years and then go into another lengthy rebuild.

I ran numbers this morning with arbitration estimates. Their payroll at this point is around 160, and they don't have a 5th starter yet(unless they roll montgomery). Also I'm not sure their CF plan, maybe they roll Happ/Almora/Heyward in CF/RF...not sure. If they add Darvish they are up to probably 185ish, a touch high but not unreasonable based on the last couple years. In 2019 though, 25 million for Darvish puts them to around 195 and they'll lose a bullpen arm(Wilson unless they extend him). I'm not sure how high their payroll can go, but I doubt they can afford $40 million for Harper. 2020(without harper) their payroll will be at roughly 185 and they'll have lost 4 more bullpen arms(cishek, strop, duensing, grimm) and Zobrist. And as has been noted, they have nobody in their farm that can come up and fill those roles for league minimum...so they'll have to dive into free agency or find a way to trade for them. By this point they'll probably have had at least a couple prospects breakout that they can trade, but probably not anybody ready to play at the mlb level. The position player side of their 25 man roster is solid(aside from heyward) and they have their 2 stars, but they have no depth behind it. The roster is built to be able to withstand 1 maybe 2 non-bryant/rizzo injuries before they have to plug in well below replacement level players. Looking at their pitching, their rotation is primarily mid rotation guys that are likely to regress. Darvish would become their best SP if signed. Their bullpen is filled with very solid pitchers in all 8 spots, but none of their relievers are as good as Chapman or Davis. They don't have that guy you can throw in in the 8th with a 1 run lead and nail it down in the playoffs, and don't have the ability to get him without shelling out cash or trading from the 25. Their pitching(and team really) are built to make the playoffs the next year or two IF they can stay relatively healthy, but not to win in the playoffs. Their pitching simply will not match up with the nationals/dodgers. I am not going to disagree that they can't match the Dodgers/Nats (only 1 year left for the Nats' run, though). You've mentioned the 31-24 finish for the Brewers as a cause for optimisim...care to know what the Cubs' record was when Schwarber was back mashing, Contreras was back (for some of it), Happ was getting full time, Quintana was on the team, etc in that same timeframe of August 1 and beyond? 36-22. They may be losing Arrieta, but Darvish will fill that void for 2 years (at least). I agree that they're not built to withstand a ton of injuries, but the Cubs have a cause for optimism as well after a rough start to last season. I've long wondered if their plan all along was to go over the luxury tax for 1 or 2 years to bring in Harper after someone like Darvish. Might be the pessimist/fatalist in me, but I do think it's a possibility.

I personally think that we can keep the majority of these guys and/or consolidate in less "major" ways. Chances are, the 2-3 guys at the bottom of our roster crunch are probably guys that the front office values less than us on the boards think. If the Marlins take 2-3 guys along with Brinson, they'll likely be guys that major league evaluators covet.

Good question. He's a 26 year old elite OFer with 5 years of control left. In no way is a Yelich acquisition abandoning the rebuild. What happens next is the question. Is this basically it? If we stand pat or do a smaller free agency move and lose the division by 7 games, where do we go after that? Yelich is still around for 4 years after the first season I just mentioned above but now you have to decide how much more of your chips to put on the table. Or do we empty out more of the farm system to try to win this year/next immediately?

Matter of fact. Yelichs 2017 stats vs some of the greats: Scherzer- BA .412 OPS 1.415 Kershaw- BA .455 OPS .955 DeGrom- BA .438 OPS .971 Kendrick- BA .400 OPS .928 This is how you win in the playoffs, because these are the type of guys you face in the playoffs. I agree with you here that Yelich is that type, but I’d like to get to the playoffs first and I’m not willing to bet on that anytime soon.

Or you manage your farm system smart, draft well, catch lightning in a bottle on other teams' failed prospects, and hit on a few international prospects every year. This is not the mid-2000s Brewers that had a top-heavy farm system. This system is very deep, with very nice prospects at all levels. Unless you think Yelich is the guy to put the Brewers over the top, we still need more. I’m the guy banging the free agency drum on here, but it’s not a lock that we can win the bidding for any of the difference makers in the next few years. So then you turn to trades...because since you’ve traded for Yelich, you’d better be shooting to win the division.

It’s a possibility, but they’re mostly out of cost-cutting mode. If someone offered, they’d maybe oblige, but their payroll over the next 2-3 years will probably just be Chen and 24 arby/prw-arby guys. It’s something I’m sure they’d like to move but they have little motivation at this point.

I want to hang on to our prospects. I would've been shopping Knebel, Santana, Shaw, Pina, Anderson, maybe Davies etc. the second out 27 was made in game 162. Braun would've been shipped out last offseason for the best offer I got from a team not on his no-trade list before his 10/5 rights kicked in. I would've done a complete scorched earth rebuild. Lose 100 for multiple years, get those top 1-3 draft picks, get all the bonus pool money to use in the later rounds. Every decent major leaguer traded for the best value I can get. I understand a lot of people don't want to build that way but that's exactly what I wanted to do and I see no value in trying to get a bunch of 2-3 WAR major league players in trades. Those are the players you get after you have an established young core that's capable of providing the 5-7 WAR seasons. So then what happens when the next group of players overachieves in a few years and the team is on the cusp of a playoff spot? Scorched earth again? I mean, when do you decide that you have the foundation of a contender? With the philosophy you propose, you are basically serving as a perpetual farm system for other MLB teams. The next group might have more elite/young prospects. I like this group but there are some older (prime-wise) contributors.

That is a great thing and I will convince myself to like the trade, but imagine the scenario in 3 years if it is Brinson/Burnes/Harrison where Brinson is a good CF with 3 years left, Burnes is a good #2, and Harrison is knocking on the door all while the Cubs run is crumbling. Your reasonable, what are the odds that all three of those guys pan out, assuming all three leave. Not that high, but if we keep trading more to try to beat the Cubs, suddenly we’ll be praying that our few remaining prospects pan out.

That is a great thing and I will convince myself to like the trade, but imagine the scenario in 3 years if it is Brinson/Burnes/Harrison where Brinson is a good CF with 3 years left, Burnes is a good #2, and Harrison is knocking on the door all while the Cubs run is crumbling.

Right, so we perpetually hoard prospects until, hopefully, it all comes together? Part of the purpose of having those prospects is to obtain more proven assets. Lets see how this plays out and then judge what we have. The other part of hoarding the prospects is to have a longer contention window as well as depth when injuries occur to your team.

And those things don't go wrong if we hoard prospects? There is always risk. No, but there might be more room for error when using those prospects on the major league field 2-3 years from now. Right now, we need a lot to comfortably be projected in front of the Cubs.