bill hAll Star

I'm not advocating for doing nothing. I'd like to see a starter on a 1 or 2 year deal, CC Sabathia type...he would be ideal in my opinion. Add a couple relievers. And that's correct, I'm banking on big steps forward from the young guys. We have to be able to count on young guys to perform to be successful as a small market franchise. We can't just buy a team like the Yankees and Red Sox, and even they bring up some players from their farm systems. Yes, in baseball 101 it says that small market teams need their young guys to do well. Totally get that. The issue I keep harping on is that this isn't the Astros' crop of young guys. It may develop into something more 2-3 years from now, but I'm not seeing an immediate spike in wins next year or even the year after. We didn't tank but we did a good job of acquiring a bunch of guys like Davies, Shaw, Anderson, and Santana. We could go a variety of different ways from here, but short term, the core group on the roster right now probably isn't much more than an 85 win team. With a healthy Nelson it might be just above that. So I'm OK waiting a few years if Stearns thinks that's the best route, but without sacrificing too many long-term assets, if they want success over the next 1, 2, maybe 3 years...they may have to make a bit of a splash trade or signing with the extra money they have. If they want to wait a bit, that's also fine. I'm a fan of the long game...but again, since we didn't tank, we don't have Carlos Correa and Alex Bregman waiting to come up in 2020.

I'll be honest that I thought Villar would break out, and I'm incredibly surprised by the year he had this year. His true talent is probably somewhere in between those extremes, closer to 2016 than 2017. But I didn't expect Guerra to post anything near what he did in 2016 again. Same with Jungmann a couple years back. I had him tabbed as almost a surefire regression candidate. Anderson is a bit younger, and we've all seen pitchers with plus changeups and command have solid or better results(marco estrada). Him finding mid 90s heat is a bonus and probably the difference between him being a low 4s ERA guy and a mid 3s ERA guy. I'm not convinced Anderson will maintain the velocity uptick, part of the reason I could see him regressing...but he won't be Guerra bad. Santana I believe is what he is, he could in fact be better than his 2017 season. Look no further than his minor league track record. Knebel was a first round talent as a known RP. As he's physically matured, he's added ticks to his fastball and become dominant. This shouldn't be overly surprising as he was 25 last year, it's not like Guerra who all of a sudden found mid 90s in his early 30s. And with Shaw, he's at his career peak. He could regress a bit, but he'll likely be a decent/good player for at least a couple more years. And he may even have some upside left if he isn't playing through injuries that he shouldn't be playing through in a playoff chase again. I think that the issue here is that if you assume Santana/Shaw/Knebel/Davies/Anderson do about the same, you're gonna need a big step forward from Arcia, Hader, Woodruff, Brinson, or Phillips to make a big difference. Because with the exact same performances (say Brinson breaks out but Shaw has a down year and everyone else is about the same), you're basically just taking last year's team and subtracting the 5-6 games that Jimmy Nelson was worth.

This move in theory would basically be a win at all costs for 3-4 years (I'd assume Arrieta gets 4 and Darvish gets 5). If the Darvish/Arrieta deals go south in 2-3 years, you probably just ride them out into the dumpster as you'd be doing a youth movement in 2021 anyways and you'd have a ton of minimum salary guys around Darvish and Arrieta's final year or two. Archer's deal is obviously affordable and not an issue. It would not preclude the Brewers from winning in 2021 or 2022 or beyond, either. They have such depth in the farm that even after dealing for Archer, they should have a good wave of young, cheap talent from 2020 and after.

Further playing along with this "never going to happen" you could do something creative like convince Braun to take a trade and go along with Nelson for Kole Calhoun and prospects (the Angels' system is terrible, but you could get 1-2 lotto tickets). That halves the yearly salary requirement for Braun (Calhoun), cuts a year off of it (Calhoun only has 2 years + $1m buyout in the 3rd), and you can platoon Broxton with him. Nelson is the lotto ticket for the Angels and fits their "3 years before Armageddon" plan and the Brewers bring some back some lotto tickets that could help down the road. Of course, that's risky as heck given that Nelson could be the best pitcher of all of them in 2019 if he truly does come back to form. But this trade basically cuts $10-20 million in salary for the next 3 years. Again, I'm just playing the game here. This isn't going to happen.

For fun, 2019 would be: Darvish 25 Arrieta 25 Braun 19 Archer 7.5 Knebel 7.5 Nelson 6.5 Anderson 6.5 Thames 6 Davies 5 Santana 5 Shaw 5 Arcia 5 Pina 3 13-14 minimum guys That's like $130 million. That's probably over what Mark would pay (who knows?) and obviously your bullpen would be very thin. Hader would be assumed to be in there, Barnes would be, and Woodruff maybe could be if not included in the Archer deal. Pina could probably be nontendered as well if he's regressing, but it's a real crunch. If they could somehow find a taker for Braun, this (pipe dream) could actually almost work with a stars and scrubs approach. But the scrubs would at least be decent prospects in the Brewers' current state, even after dealing some of them for Archer.

Well, I'm on your side that this won't happen due to competition and yeah, just probably won't. I will say that if it somehow did, they have the system to handle that depth problem. As noted above, they could probably squeeze it in payroll-wise this coming year. Where is the Yuni B or Kotsay on the roster? If an injury occurs, we have organizational depth to bring in a serviceable prospect at almost any position. 2019 and 2020 would be a crunch. You'd have to probably beg to offload Braun and you'd probably be non-tendering Villar, Perez, Jeffress for sure and you'd even consider non-tendering Nelson if he doesn't look back to form at the end of 2018.

To me, unless the bullpen is drastically improved depth-wise or they bring in Lynn or Arrieta, even if a lot of the other guys were not a mirage (Shaw, Anderson, Knebel, Sogard, Thames, Brinson, Phillips, Arcia) all either play the same or improve, the team will be in some trouble. Without an addition to the rotation, you've got Anderson and Davies that are both good pitchers (let's assume they repeat/improve) and then you've got Suter, Hader, Woodruff probably and maybe Burnes or Guerra or Wilkerson factor in down the road. All of those guys are 4-5 inning guys a lot of nights. The bullpen is going to get torn up and there is also major risk that every guy in the lower portion of the rotation does not provide a good season. I think that even being optimistic about guys having the same or an improved year could still see for more losses. Arrieta or Lynn may be a 3 WAR pitcher this year in theory, but I think it could be worth 6 or 7 wins total because you are putting one more risk in the rotation of one of the rotation guys being a mirage (Suter, let's just say in this example) and then cycling through our AAAA guys that also may stink, meaning we end up with a -2 or -3 WAR guy in the rotation with poor performances and burning through our bullpen. I think you could probably also get by with adding 2-3 free agent signings in the bullpen and being fine with the fact that Suter, Hader, or Woodruff may only go 4 innings some nights and yank them even if they're doing "OK" but knowing that the 3rd time the order that they'll struggle.

I’m just here to note that Domingo Santa would be my favorite player.

By the time most of those guys get their shot and truly start to hit their stride, Shaw/Nelson/Anderson/Davies/Knebel/Santana/Braun/Thames will be near the end of their contracts. And a hypothetical Lance Lynn or Jake Arrieta deal would be nearly over. I don't have extremely high expectations for that group you list at the top, but chances are, most of them will be hitting their stride in 2020 in the pros if any break through...just in time to have half of the roster turning over anyways in the following 2 offseasons. Absolutely. That's why I rather find out now who could be part of a future rotation and bullpen. Sign Arieta, or don't sign him. Trade for Archer, or not. Either way they are not winning a WS with this core group anyhow, So I'm all about the next wave. I'm building around Santana, Arcia, Brinson, Phillips, Hader, etc. And most of the guys you mentioned above aren't THAT old, some of them can still be pieces a few years from now. I'm thinking Anderson and Davies, maybe Shaw/Knebel. Certainly Santana. Guys like Ponce and Perrin are trade bait at this point, and the return isn't much. That's why I rather see if we have something there, let them pitch. It's not that big of a reach given their backgrounds. Maybe you find lightning in a bottle, now they're much more valuable either to keep or trade. Otherwise, it's a panic trade before this time next year. I just think it's much more likely than you think that we finally get to see what Ortiz, Burnes, Ponce, Perrin, Derby, etc. are plus the current grouping in 2020...and it's an 80-85 win team. So then we're stuck trying to decide again. We don't have an Astros-esque collection of talent. I think we could spend now and then spend again 4 years from now to supplement the steady flow of solid major league players. I am more confident in what we have. It's a deep, solid farm system. Let's spend on some higher dollar players and let the system still speak for itself. Does Jake Arrieta win you a World Series with this group? No. But he or Lynn could win you 2-3 extra games, get you into the playoffs a few times in the next 3 years, and go from there. This isn't a team that just stands out and says "100 wins for 5 years until everyone gets way too expensive." This is a team and farm system that has an 85 win core for the next decade. Like I said, I think this is a Cardinals-esque set of talent, not Astros. Meaning, we'll always have a good, MLB player and some All-Stars waiting in the wings and they'll keep payroll low for 15-20 roster slots. I don't see it as a recent Astros group of talent where we have 3 MVP candidates and we know that our window is a set 5 year period.

By the time most of those guys get their shot and truly start to hit their stride, Shaw/Nelson/Anderson/Davies/Knebel/Santana/Braun/Thames will be near the end of their contracts. And a hypothetical Lance Lynn or Jake Arrieta deal would be nearly over. I don't have extremely high expectations for that group you list at the top, but chances are, most of them will be hitting their stride in 2020 in the pros if any break through...just in time to have half of the roster turning over anyways in the following 2 offseasons.

I don't think Detroit is too worried about just dumping their contracts just to dump them. Other than Cabrera, they've gotten rid of a lot of what was on the books that will matter. Zimmermann will basically be gone when they're done with their rebuild. They can hold on and pray that he develops some sort of value to deal him away in 2019. I don't think that package is enough for 4 years of Fulmer.

Archer has 4 years of control with options on his extension, FWIW.

A lot of pitchers have opted out of their deals early. If he gets more money up front, he could easily leave for one more big deal and then completely fall in the tank on that one. Easily? Just don't see Arrieta at the age of 34-35, pitching well enough to earn more than $20M per season after that. He would love to be guaranteed that money and more than likely love to have the Brewers pay him that while he stinks up the joint later in his career. Playing with fire. Fair...for some reason I thought Greinke was a bit older as a comparison.

A lot of pitchers have opted out of their deals early. If he gets more money up front, he could easily leave for one more big deal and then completely fall in the tank on that one.

So what's wrong with offering Arrieta $30/$25/$25/20 with an opt-out after 2 years? Seems like that's best for all parties. I get that Mark may have other business priorities, but if he's going Y2Y and Arrieta and a reliever are the signings this year, he may like this. That is so minimal. Are we really going to be crunching for $5mil in 4 years? I think the frontloading someone was suggesting was a lot more major than that. Yes, $5 million is a solid reliever or highly paid utility man. This is how you get creative to overpay a player and not have it affect you much if the contract goes south. I'd go 30/30/20/20 if I could and have an opt-out halfway. If he's that good, he was worth the $30 and he is gone in his mid 30s. The Heyward signing was bad and some could argue he didn't help them win the World Series at all, but their other frontloaded guys did help win the World Series and are declining in skill as expected. It's nice for the Cubs now that they at least can squeeze another player or two in with the frontloaded risks over the next few years.

So what's wrong with offering Arrieta $30/$25/$25/20 with an opt-out after 2 years? Seems like that's best for all parties. I get that Mark may have other business priorities, but if he's going Y2Y and Arrieta and a reliever are the signings this year, he may like this.

Financially front loading is a poor choice for quite a few reasons...simply put. Really? Do you think the Cubs regret their "over the top" free agent signings (Lester/Zobrist/Heyward) being much cheaper now as they are on the decline?

A good GM knows where the money needs to be spent right now. If they truly think Arrieta is worth it, that means they're pretty sure that one of Woodruff/Hader and Suter/Wilkerson/Guerra are just depth guys and maybe Nelson won't be a factor. We've got a bevy of good OF prospects and solid prospects up the middle. If those guys fail, then we'll be rebuilding for all of Arrieta's 4 year tenure anyways, in which case it doesn't matter much. If Arrieta is a massive bust and as you predict, the need shifts...we'll have money for 1-2 more big contracts if we want after 2020 and 2021 when Braun/Thames (3 years) and Arrieta (4 years) are gone. I think that the way the salary is set up, the Brewers can probably frontload Arrieta's deal a bit if this really does happen. I didn't predict Arieta would be a massive bust. My point is who cares if he's really good this year? If they truly think Woodruff, Nelson, etc. won't be a factor then just adding Arieta won't make a difference anyhow. Just throwing money out there because we have it wouldn't be disastrous for 2018, but he's not going to sign for one year , of course. Just look at the state of the rotation. Other than Davies, we know what he is, everyone else is a question. Adding a #3ish type starter does what for this team in 2018? I mean, even adding him everything single thing would have to go right for this roster to be a WS contender. Finally dumped Garza's salary, still stuck with Braun's for three more years. Let's just wait until it really is time to go for it before we throw more big contracts around. Those salaries (Braun's will a bit right now) did not hinder us from anything. Garza's salary rotted while the team rebuilt. It's a differing opinion of the window. For me, our strength is probably a good movement of minor league players for the next decade. Not the Astros or Cubs; think Cardinals. We always will have a good player waiting. I'm OK spending now to be an 87-92 win team for several years. I just don't think the elite elite talent is there. What's going to change in 2 years? We'll likely have a better version of Brinson/Arcia/maybe Santana/Phillips but we don't know if Shaw/Knebel/Thames even Braun will repeat this year's performance? Like I said, if we had our version or Danny Salazar, Corey Kluber, and Carlos Carrasco all in AA right now, by all means, wait 2 years. We don't. For me, this team has a 10-15 player base that will make it easy to win 80 games for the next decade (I'm guessing and projecting the minors system after 5 years from now, but we have great depth right now). After that, we need to find the other few elite players to get to the playoffs several times. They aren't waiting in our system other than maybe Brinson or Hader. I don't see a reason to wait. Because if we sign Arrieta now, the contract will be nearly over when you are "ready." So then we can just sign another big dollar player. Stearns would be an absolute magician and would win GM of the decade if he turned the current core into a perennial 90+ win team without dealing the farm or some big signings. I just don't understand what you want to "wait and see" on. If Brinson, Phillips, etc. are not what we thought, then we'll hit 2020 with 2 years left on Arrieta's deal needing to rebuild. If those guys are all really that good, then Arrieta is an overpaid, yet good MLB pitcher helping us try to win a championship. There will still be plenty of time to sign more overpriced free agents when Braun's deal ends and Arrieta's does.

Just a note that the Wolf signing wasn't a terrible one. Wolf was solid for the first 2 years and really struggled his 3rd year. The others were clearly awful though. Wolf is the only FA pitcher i can think of that we signed to a more than 3 year deal that actually worked out...in the history of the franchise. In Jeff Suppan's worst year (2009), our #4 and #5 starters had a 6.36 and 6.38 ERA and we had basically nothing in the minors ready to go. In 2015 (Lohse falls off cliff and Garza begins to tumble), our top pitchers that rose from the minors were Taylor Jungmann (good year, not an MLB pitcher), Mike Fiers, and Wily Peralta. I think we'd all agree that those guys weren't clogging up the rotation from a truckload of good MLB talent. Sometimes you overpay players when the options behind them aren't good. They were bad contracts by value but the only option if we didn't spend big bucks on Jeff Suppan or Kyle Lohse would be to...overpay a different pitcher, because we had none. Let's stop looking at what a player was worth and let's weigh what a player provides within the parameters of a 25 man roster. If the Brewers theoretically had a 90 win team with a hold in the rotation but a $20 million payroll...Would you pay Clayton Kershaw $80 million for one year to join the Brewers? I would. He could win the Cy Young and not be worth that money. There is risk in signing someone like Arrieta or Lynn for 4 years, but I also don't like just trashing the idea of signing guys because they'll be overpaid. We only have 25 roster spots and a lot of guys are already locked into lower salaries for the next several years, even with arbitration values. Kyle Lohse, Matt Garza, Jeff Suppan, and Randy Wolf may all crack the back end of the top 20 pitchers that the Brewers have had in the past 20 years.

Yeah, the Cubs did this with Zobrist, Lester, and Heyward. I wouldn't even be opposed to giving Arrieta an opt-out at 2 years if it put us over the top to win the bidding. As I've said, Arrieta can make more money in the first 2 years and go find a bigger deal somewhere else. If that happens, you get 2 good years and you get the blessing in disguise that the guy leaves when he hits his mid 30s. If he stinks, you've got less of a burden for the final 2 years (assuming a frontloaded deal).

A good GM knows where the money needs to be spent right now. If they truly think Arrieta is worth it, that means they're pretty sure that one of Woodruff/Hader and Suter/Wilkerson/Guerra are just depth guys and maybe Nelson won't be a factor. We've got a bevy of good OF prospects and solid prospects up the middle. If those guys fail, then we'll be rebuilding for all of Arrieta's 4 year tenure anyways, in which case it doesn't matter much. If Arrieta is a massive bust and as you predict, the need shifts...we'll have money for 1-2 more big contracts if we want after 2020 and 2021 when Braun/Thames (3 years) and Arrieta (4 years) are gone. I think that the way the salary is set up, the Brewers can probably frontload Arrieta's deal a bit if this really does happen.

Times are different right now as we have slightly more pitching depth, but I always have this response (assuming money is not an issue) with Suppan, Wolf, Lohse, Garza...who missed an opportunity? One could argue that Woodruff should've taken the ball a bit earlier this year instead of Garza, but otherwise we were generally just pitching Suppan or Lohse instead of guys like Claudio Vargas or Chris Narveson. I hated the Suppan contract but he pitched probably slightly better than Manny Parra would have if we handed him a rotation spot early. I expect Arrieta's ERA/FIP to progress like 3.50 this year, 3.75, 4.00, 4.50 in a hypothetical 4-year deal, but that's probably still better than the replacement guys, even if we have better replacement guys now than we are used to. There's a chance that he is very good as well. If Nelson comes back to form, Anderson remains good, Davies remains good, Woodruff pans out, Burnes is ready, and/or Hader is good, and/or Suter is truly a rotation option...then I'll deal with that issue. I'd love to have it. In that case, maybe we could trade Davies for a load of prospects to help us in the next window. Chances are, though, in that list of 7 guys I just put in that above list that 2 or 3 are hurt or don't pan out. In which case, now we have 5 or 6 good pitchers with Arrieta.

Next off season, Shaw/Santana/Davies all hit arbitration for the first time. Those 3 alone likely increase our payroll by $10-15 million in 2019. Other guys currently in arbitration will also get increases. Guarantees salaries on Anderson/Thames go up a bit. I get that currently we project in the low 60s in 2018 at the moment. Let's say we add Arrieta at only $20 million per(will probably be closer to 25), and then add 2 relievers at $7 million per for 2 years. With increases in arbitration etc, we project around $110 million in 2019. All of a sudden, we have almost no flexibility in the 2018 offseason to make moves to improve the club. 2020 wouldn't be much better, all the arbitration costs would still be high and we'd have a number of holes to fill in the bullpen and at 1b. The idea of adding Arrieta and trading for Archer and spending a bunch of money because we have a low payroll and young talent is no different from a 13 year old getting their hands on their parents credit card. We can make additions, but we need to be smart about how we do it and make good sound decisions...and definitely not overextend ourselves and waste this advantage that Stearns has created. I think if Mark approves of the signing of Arrieta that he is willing to go up to $120-$130 in 2019 or 2020 if the situation arises to need one or two more relievers and then the payroll begins to clear itself out again in 2020 and 2021. If Arrieta is a bust contract, I doubt that the Brewers will be "one or two relievers away" from contending in 2019 and 2020. Without Arrieta, you're probably a good/elite pitcher plus more away from being good in 2019 and 2020 anyways.

Add to the fact that in 2020 and 2021 offseasons you have: Shaw gone, Nelson gone, Braun (and his $) gone, Thames gone, Anderson, Davies near the end of his contract, Santana near the end, Knebel nearing the end of his... Since we aren't and won't tank at this point, I see it as 2 windows to compete with great depth always filling out the roster with a few high-dollar signings. Almost nobody from that above list of players is going to warrant a long contract. Fit Arrieta or a similar pitcher and some other guys in over the next few years in with the solid current roster + good minors depth and see what you can do until 2021. When that year rolls around, there will probably be a second window with Phillips/Brinson/Arcia/Hader/Burnes/etc. all in their primes with a few years and once again you'll have money to spend. It's a strange situation where almost all of the guys I listed in that top paragraph will be in their early 30s when their arbitrations or current deals end (save for Santana and Davies). We probably will choose to keep one or two of them, but it's not like we need to save up to try to keep Fielder and Braun. It's a window of late-prime, solid players that probably mostly walk at the end of this. Might as well spend what Mark is offering and see if we can win in this window.

This is the case with basically every free agent, ever. Yes, Arrieta presents slightly more risk as a pitcher and as one with declining velocity...but who are we saving the money for? If not Arrieta this year, we'll be thinking about signing some other 3.75 FIP/ERA guy for $100 million next year, pushing the contract burden a year further down the road. I've said it in other posts but I am good with going with our youth and trying to find cheap guys on 1-year deals to fill out the rotation. The only way I want the Brewers to be spending money on a starting pitcher if it is that true ace type of pitcher. Arrieta doesn't seem to be that guy anymore and I really wonder how much of that great year that he had wasn't because of some things he was taking. I don't want the Brewers to be in the market for overpriced pitching. Just don't see a need for it. Plenty of other ways to build a roster. But you run into the point of continually running a $75 million payroll trying to go all with youth and striking out at several positions. We don't have the young Astros talent waiting in the wings. We do have some decent depth in the starting rotation now, but we don't have an ace in the wings. I've said it on a bunch of threads that I'm not sure I advocate specifically Arrieta, Lynn, Cobb, or somebody next year...but if Mark wants to spend on a position, I'm not going to complain. It isn't going to cripple our payroll given what we already have on it. The Brewers will never afford a true ace in free agency. They should try for some damaged goods ones like Arrieta and pray he becomes one again or just live with a solid #3 starter out of it. Acquiring a true ace will involve trading half of the farm system and a shorter contract.