bill hAll Star

TDA is a good 2nd/3rd piece in the trade. I don't like that his control years don't really lineup with what we want, but he's a good rehab project that we could flip later or try to extend into our window if he pans out.

He's fine as a throw-in. It's not impossible to think that if he's healthy, he could hit .275/.350/.470 with half of his games at Miller Park. Citi Field has crushed his healthy days on the Mets. I'd more reasonably expect .250/.330/.430 or something like that when healthy in Miller Park, but the above line isn't a crazy one. If he's the centerpiece of the deal...then, yeah. That would be terrible.

“Welcome to Lee Carvallo's Putting Challenge. I am Carvallo. Now, choose a club. (Beep) You have chosen a three wood. May I suggest a putter? (Beep) Three wood. Now enter the force of your swing. I suggest feather touch. (Beep, beep, beep) You have entered "power drive". Now, push seven eight seven to swing." (Beep beep beep) "Ball is in...parking lot. Would you like to play again? (Beep) You have selected, "No.”

My annoyance with the deadline is guys like Rosenthal and Heyman keep tweeting "Padres looking at Ubaldo Jimenez for Upton Jr." (I know Upton is now gone) and "Tigers have offered James McCann for Jonathan Lucroy" or "d'Arnaud for Lucroy is heating up." Unfortunately, 90% of Twitter doesn't follow baseball enough and they start building the idea that their crappy player that is salary offset or veteran filler in the trade is basically equal. After that, Rosenthal or Heyman then, you know, just quietly mention the small print...like, "high-end prospects would also need to go to the Padres in the Upton/Jimenez, or to the Brewers in Lucroy/James McCann or Lucroy/d'Arnaud" deals. Why even mention the first part? They're making the filler of trades the main talking point. "If I want to buy this $100 item, I can start by putting $1 on the counter for the cashier."

Naquin is a David Murphy or Matt Joyce to me. He's an older prospect that will have a nice, long career as a platoon bat. He's playing over his head right now. No thanks. Why would Cleveland trade him? They need him right now as Brantley insurance. The only reason they'd trade him is if they know they're selling extremely high.

He's cooled off recently, but I'm not sure Lucroy is a major upgrade from Willson Contreras.

If it's one modest prospect, you keep Jeffress. That's not value and Milwaukee is better off keeping him. I would play chicken on that game all day long. We aren't here to serve big market clubs. We have our own franchise with a terrific fan base. This isn't an Axford or Kolb or Turnbow. The last thing Stearns needs to be doing is trading off young, controllable assets for less value. I agree. I just don't see a match out there for his value. He isn't a "wow" type of guy for this season and most teams don't really care that they're going to get a solid reliever for 3 years at OK arbitration costs after this. They're not willing to overpay for that. Too many other options. Stearns is right to ask for a lot. I hope it happens. Just doesn't seem to line up for me.

I cannot fathom getting what some are asking for. Teams will just go for a slightly less optimal pitcher for much less inspiring prospects rather than pay big for Jeffress. The Cubs overpaid for Chapman but he is a difference-making elite pitcher for the playoffs. Ken Giles had similar team control but also Ks 12 batters per 9. Teams would be happy to have Jeffress...but just for one modest prospect. Not 1-2 very good ones.

The Nats can go and call probably 10-20 teams about guys that are either on par with Jeffress or a slight downgrade. That's the issue. If the Brewers say "give us 2 good prospects" I'll bet that they can go and find at least ONE team offering Jeanmar Gomez, Nate Jones, Zach Duke, Xavier Cedeno, Boone Logan, (the list goes on, I'm done) for less than "2 good prospects." Some of those teams may not be offering a guy that has as nice of a team control situation as Jeffress, but I'd worry about that next year given that I can throw 10 fixer-upper relievers to throw against the wall and 1 of them will probably put up what Jeffress has done next year...or I can keep signing the Fernando Rodneys of the world to $3 million deals for one year.

I've had this argument elsewhere, but I don't see the value in comparison to Chapman. Jeremy Jeffress probably has 3 years and maybe $12 million left assuming arbitration numbers. That's pretty nice. Someone of his ilk nowadays may cost $15-20 million over 3 years coming into next year's offseason. The issue is that there are 20 teams that might be offering someone with the value of Jeffress (at varying contracts remaining). There is 1 Aroldis Chapman. There might be 3 other guys in his class and 2 of them also play for the Yankees. Chapman is someone that provides a legitimate difference trying to win the World Series. The Cubs already have 2 pitchers of Jeffress' caliber. He doesn't move the needle. Fully acknowledging an overpay for Chapman, you can't compare the two situations.

I would imagine it is a silly idea on both sides, but just offer a ton of money to sign Luc back after next year if you want him around so badly. I am not a fan of signing him long term at all, but there you go...best of both worlds if you're really set on having Lucroy around.

It just depends on what you can get for Braun. I, too, would like to trade Braun for good prospects, but I don't want to trade him for junk just to save money. I really don't want to trade him for junk and then go out and spend more money on someone like Bruce. That to me would be counter-productive, so in that case, it's better just holding onto Braun. If Stearns is able to bring back a boatload of prospects for Lucroy, and a boatload of prospects for Braun, plus getting some top 100 guys for our relievers, then you set your sights a couple of years out and trade guys like Carter with two years of control. That would lead to a big down year the next year or two, followed by an extended period where we would continually have good pre-arby players coming from the farm to the MLB team. Once we get to this point, it would then make sense to sign some veteran FAs to fill in the holes where we don't have good pre-arby/arby guys. If we can't get a good deal for Braun, it may make sense to hold onto guys like Carter, and some of Smith/Thornburg/Jeffress for another year and see how things play out, as we can always trade these guys next season. So again, it all depends on what we could get for Braun. Someone posted a link the other day (maybe it was Splitter's "inside stuff"), which said other GMs know Braun is worth a lot, but they may not be willing to pay what he's worth. I think that "if" will be a big determinant as to how deep we cut. If we don't trade Braun, I think there's a greater likelihood that we hold onto Carter and one or two of our late inning relievers. While I have my preferences, reality doesn't always match up with my preferences, so I'm fine with either of these "rebuilds," as long as the end goal remains to build a sustainably good MLB team by keeping a lot of young talent at all levels of the organization and maintaining flexibility. There is not one cut-and-dried path to reach this goal, so we'll see what Stearns can pull out of his hat over the next week. I agree on waiting for the best deal for Braun. The post above a few above mine talked about maybe holding on to Braun and Lucroy for "veteran leadership." Yours was more discussing just keeping Braun, which is more sensible. The Pirates, Cubs, and probably Cards are way too good to think about winning in 2017 and maybe 2018. I think Mark is going to want to speed up the process starting in 2018, but I'm just presenting a much better solution if you're dying for veterans on the roster you can just buy them all in 2018.

I cannot wait until we get out of Colorado Springs. Cavernous ballpark + Colorado altitude = throwaway stats. Specifically batting average. Look at what it's done to non-MLB caliber players like DJ Lemahieu and others. I realize that the rest of the PCL is already easy to hit in, but Wren is hitting .376 at home this year (.286 on the road). I don't really have the time or ability to find the splits of Colorado Springs splits, but here are some fun recent Rockies: Player(year(s)), Avg H/A DJ Lemahieu (career), .325/.256 - includes a short Cubs stint Carlos Gonzalez (career), .306/.267 - includes a short A's stint Nolan Arenado (career), .307/.258 Mark Reynolds (2016), .296/.252 Todd Helton (career), .345/.287 Trevor Story (2016), .313/.232 Jordan Pacheco (lol) (2012), .345/.274 Throw the stats away or subtract .30-.40 batting average points. I realize that any Rockie away split includes a heavy dose of SF/SD/LAD, but it's still pretty insane.

Why not just trade Braun/Lucroy and overpay for 2 older vets in 2018 if you're looking for the "experienced vets must be in house" method? I'll take the 5 prospects and have Jay Bruce and Alex Cobb (just throwing names of free agents out there) as the team ambassadors.

I was shocked by the moves they made a few years ago. Myers, Kemp, and Upton have all had some success recently, but going with the "I can't hit righties" Norris, relying on Wil Middlebrooks to try to hit at 3B in Petco Park, trading the farm for Kimbrel, etc. made no sense. It felt like a new fantasy owner just seeing the counting stats and making moves. So many flawed moves. None of these guys play well to Petco Park. Upton made sense for them as CF that you need in that park. There is some optimism at the next wave and what they're doing. I like this a lot more.

Brewers fan in me: Good! They've weakened their future outlook and the value does not line up. Likely weakens the pipeline for 2018 and beyond when hopefully the Brewers are competing again. Cubs/Illinois teams hater in me: Damn. I don't want the Cubs to win it all and while the WAR of this is heavily in the Yankees favor...the Cubs have probably already clinched the division for all intents and purposes this year. For any given game in the playoffs, the value of Chapman is immense.

Contreras is already very good. I get the idea that the Cubs might want to strike now and win a World Series now, but I'm not even sure that Contreras is a downgrade from Lucroy. I'm not sure they'd even make a Contreras for Lucroy trade straight up.

If you're Texas, what would you rather have? Gallo (probably similar production to Carter) + some ace/top of the rotation pitcher acquired from those other 3 players OR Carter (this year very similar to Gallo) + Lucroy? Chirinos hasn't been terrible at catcher with the bat. Also factor in that Moreland at 1B, Rua platooning in at the corners/DH, Choo returning from the DL eventually is not really any worse than they had with Fielder in the lineup, because he was trash this year. Also factor in they have a historically bad pitching staff (all of them) outside of Hamels, Darvish, and maybe one or two bullpen arms. Texas does not make this trade. They need to use their prospects to acquire pitching.

What's your plan when Profar is a free agent right when the Brewers' window is opening? Trade him? I'm not very high on Norris at this point. I'd go lower in the org for that as well.

Yeah, we'll have a high pick in the 2017 draft and 2018 draft. After that (beginning in the 2018 season), as I had stated earlier, I don't think Mark is going to go all in...but he's going to start to spend. If some of the high $, short term, high reward short signings/acquisitions fail, they could be drafting high again in 2019 or maybe even 2020. They'll have 2016, 2017, and 2018 drafts for sure and it's not like they'll be drafting #30 in 2019/2020 either. I just don't know if the fans or the owner are going to want to sit through not supplementing the roster (without trading away the future) starting in about 2 years.

Garza's inning soaking so far in 2016: 4, 6, 6, 5 2/3, 4 1/3, 5 1/3. He's giving young pitchers opportunities all right, but they're all out of the bullpen. At some point a string of 4-5 decent starts (if he's capable of that) will be more that offset by the fact that they followed 30 some starts that were at best reflective of a bad #5 starter and teams won't be fooled into thinking they are getting Garza of 4-5 years ago. So what's the difference in just trying to squeeze the value out? Are we going to tell our grandkids about the innings that Tyler Cravy picked up at the end of the 2016 season before he was demoted back to a career of AAA baseball?

I'm definitely looking to deal Garza but will give him as long of a leash as possible to try to get some value before I actually cut ties if no trade can be found. Given that Anderson's rotation spot isn't being very tightly gripped and you never know if Guerra is a sell high pitcher, the only guy that might be worthy of a shot at a rotation spot is Wilkerson...and there should be room at some point. If you are dying to give someone another shot in the rotation, you can move Chase Anderson to the long relief guy for a while or something. If the non-waiver deadline passes and we've still gotten nothing, then I think it may be time to cut ties...but honestly, it wouldn't be the worst thing to try again to get some value from him next season. At the very least he will soak up innings while the (right now non-existent) crop of younger pitchers do not accrue service time in a wasted season of 2017.

Agreed to a point, but problem is that big free agents don't take 2-3 year deals. And big stars only get traded for coveted prospects. And teams don't salary dump players that are playing up to that contract. Big stars get 8 years/$184M like Jason Heyward got from the Cubs...and he's hardly even a star, certainly isn't this year. Or the 8/$186M that Sabathia got, or 9/$214M that Fielder got. If you could pay guys for 2-3 years at a time, even big sums of money, it'd be much easier for the Brewers. But in order to get the best you basically have to sign them to too long a contract and throw away the money when they stink by the end of it. As someone said earlier, the Brewers could spend a lot of money to contend now, but it would be at the expense of being terrible again in a few years. Their best hope of contending and maintaining some level of success is Stearns' dogma of young, controllable talent. It's tough because there is absolutely no guarantee it will pan out, but the odds are just higher playing it that way. You can hitch your wagon to 1 big signing maybe, but I'm suggesting you go for the deals later on in free agency. Ian Desmond, Colby Rasmus (yes, he took arbitration, I know but he was probably available for an overpaid 1-2 years), Fowler, and a slew of other guys did come in for less years. There's always a John Lackey-type late career deal for 2 years. Of course, winning is a key factor in getting the shorter veteran deals. I'm looking at the 2013 champion Red Sox: Stephen Drew - 2 year contract Dempster - 1 year contract Napoli - 3 year contract Victorino - 3 year contract They had a handful of other players on short contracts as well. These are the types of deals I'm looking at. Are they worth the value that you're paying them? Generally no. I just see some short term help being added regardless. If you sign 1 or 2 guys to 4 year contracts, you're still probably fine payroll-wise. You may need some $ for an early extension to Arcia or something, but there will be a lot of room to work with over the next 5 years. I'm looking at someone like Pineda maybe being a free agent that season. If he's still having up and down success, maybe you give him a 1-year "show me" deal with some sort of vesting option. This is what the Pirates did with Liriano and they've added help in Freese and Jaso. The Brewers can probably go a little bigger than Jaso/Freese, but there are short deals to be had.

I'm going to sound like a broken record here, but as of now, this is what the 2018 payroll will probably look like: Carter - arbitration 4: est. $9,000,000 (if he's even still around) Nelson - arbitration 1: est. $3,500,000 Villar - arbitration 1: est. $3,500,000 Thornburg - arbitration 2: est $3,000,000 MAYBE - Braun $20,000,000 Probably a few other guys like Chase Anderson as the swing/#5 guy in arby 1 or 2 for a couple million. There will probably be 15 guys on the active roster making $550,000 or whatever the minimum is at that time. Point is, the Brewers' active roster payroll will be somewhere in the $30-$40 million range without Braun. Given inflation, Mark A would probably be willing to pay $120 million if the Brewers were in theoretically competitive in 2018. Of course I am not advocating a spending spree like that, but there is room. You can overpay 4 guys or take salary dumps and still be sitting at $80-$90 million without much damage to your 2020 and beyond payroll. I am generally a fan of building organically, and waiting it out one or two more seasons after 2018 might be prudent so that your hopeful "older" crop of Phillips, Hader, Arcia is a couple of years in and the next wave is arriving in 2020/2021...but why not go for a few short-term deals? The 2018 class is LOADED and I wouldn't expect the Brewers to factor in too much. Maybe you could argue overpaying 1 stud that you think will still be effective 4-5 years in. Again, this is not my desire, but this is professional sports owner strategy here. I see Mark and Stearns letting 2017 be a wasteland of a team. I know that I was scolded for estimating the years that this will take, but it's coming either way. Either the older prospects are mostly duds and Mark will get impatient or there will be a nice supplemental add to the roster of 3-4 players while the young guys get their feet wet. Problem is, the Cubs, Pirates, and Cards all still might be pretty good...plus the Reds' rebuild will be turning the corner. I just can't see Mark waiting much longer than 2018. My hope is that it's just shrewd additions for 2018-2020 and after that, the Brewers have their pipeline continuously flowing like the Cardinals and Giants do.

Like I said in earlier posts, don't mortgage any prospects or anything like that, but you can start trying to sign some short, productive contracts in 2018. Realistically, the Arcia/Hader/Phillips (and a few others) group probably won't really be competitive in their own right until 2020, but I think you can start churning some excitement with a puncher's chance in 2018 and maybe break into playoff contention in 2019.