Austin Tatious

Gut feel. Brewers and Yankees make a deal for Burnes within the week. Yanks are motivated and far more decisive than their rival Orioles. I think there’s a good match here to be had.

Agree completely that the Yankees seem to be the best fit both ways for a trade that makes sense. Hampton, Arias, and another pitcher who has the peripherals they like in terms of movement and spin rate would make sense.

I’m glad we stayed away

Very good stuff, Spencer (and Joseph). Love the insights and info. I am confident that the data you provided is the reason the Brewers wanted this precise pitcher. No, he’s not ranked highly, but the Brewers obviously liked his particular metrics. I think if we are lucky we get a Mike Fiers caliber pitcher. He was very solid for a period.

Great article, Reilly. Finally, an insightful piece from a Milwaukee perspective.

Gross. Doesn’t seem realistic. The trade out would be Burnes and the Burnes comp pick which is a high pick. Scherzer at age 39 and the middle of a season landed the Mets their top prospect in Acuna’s little brother. Burnes is worth considerably more than that. Brewers aren’t taking spare parts for Burnsie. When fans write articles, they love to trade their spare parts and redundancies for elite players, lol. The acquiring team needs to feel pain or else it’s not realistic.

Last year might have been my favorite draft as far as I can remember. Knock on wood. Famous last words, right? Now watch it crash and burn! Love Tod Johnson. I say that as someone who relentlessly hated our draft process for many years and I took a beating on this site over it.

Outstanding article, Cheesehead. Please write more!! I am expecting us to have a heavy pitching draft between college and juco pitchers. I was surprised like you were with how many high school guys we took last year, but it makes more sense when you consider they took advantage of one of their inefficiencies, drafting later and paying them far above slot as an opportunity to upgrade as many picks above grade as possible.

Texas might be my favorite trade partner if we can get Porter and others. I definitely want pitching back with upside. Then I have no problem dealing Williams to Baltimore for a package involving Mayo. I’m comfortable with the back of the bullpen headlined by Uribe, Megill, and Milner. You’d still have Payamps in a setup role. Upcoming infield involving Mayo, Black, Dunn, Turang and Wilken in the next couple of years. Personally I would extend Adames since Burnes and Williams would be gone and there would be money. Adames has leadership qualities that can be overlooked when looking at stats. Young starting pitching with Gasser, Porter, Rodriguez, hopefully Mis. Good young OF. That young core would be exciting to build from. Hopefully we hit college pitching hard in the ‘24 draft and international market.

One of my favorite prospects. Love his profile. Would like to see how he develops on breaking pitches going away from him. Can he be patient and go the other way? May determine a lot. That’s a tough skill.

No, I would build around Frelick not trade him. I’m not worried about his rookie stats. I think he showed good signs of being a sparkplug. He’s going to set the table, get on base, and score runs. We will really regret it if we trade him.

Wiemer is an enigma to me. To be fair, though, IMO he needed all of ‘23 at Nashville but was pressed into MLB action. Absolutely love his power/speed/defense (range and arm) combination. But I absolutely hate his approach at the plate. Wild and erratic. If that can get reined in, he can be a quality player. That’s an unknown though. Out of Mitchell, Chourio, Frelick, I’d put Wiemer behind them on our priority list.

Spencer is one of the most astute and rising Brewer observers out there so this was an interesting read. The trades were very clever. I would hate to trade Mitchell but the return would be worth it. I can’t see the Murphy free agent deal though. Regarding Turang I still think he can be a .260 hitter with plus defense and base running. That equates to a quality player. People are down on him but it’s the rare player who cones in to MLB and doesn’t need a big adjustment. Look at Freddy, Burnes and Woody. All took time and struggled initially. As CC says, no jump in level is more difficult than going into MLB. There’s value with Turang as he has time to adjust. That doesn’t mean we don’t trade him as Spencer suggests. If he does come back and he sticks at .220 next year then maybe the upside won’t materialize. Personally I hope we re-sign Adames at a rate commensurate with a guy who has two straight years of struggling with his hit tool and who isn’t a top of the order bat. I still think he can be a core player at the right price. If we don’t bring him back, as most people seem to expect, I suspect Turang is back. But I do think we make a couple of surprising, if not jarring, moves this offseason.

I have defended a lot of the recent moves but this one is a head scratcher. Bauers has a profile to avoid not acquire.

Maybe but IMO you should QC what the rival authors post for credibility. Love the site, the moderation, and love contributing but let’s be honest there are some absurd articles on the front page by Cub fans with no self awareness. It’s too common. That’s just the honest truth.

You’d have to pay him considerably more than that because of his position, defense, and power relative to his position. He’s not getting paid based on where he is in the batting order and rightfully so.

Has anyone seen any names (and rankings) that the Brewers are linked to for the January 2024 signings? I found some lists of players but no mention of teams the players are associated with like we used to see.

Good looking swing. You can see he can generate pop.

I put him at 19 but not at the expense of Baez who is at 20 (I have him higher). I disagree with the consensus quite a bit.

The missing alot in the strike zone is cringy as it’s shades of Hiura. Hiura favoring that exaggerated upper cut to get the ball in the air while compromising contact wrecked his chances. Hopefully Dunn can overcome that because it’s a major flaw. Regarding defense, the scouts who like to put immobile guys at second are shortsighted IMO. Second base requires range. You want a guy who can get to balls. Look at Turang who played a brilliant second. He was rangy as heck. Despite all this, I’m intrigued by Dunn. The Brewers quite obviously see him as a late bloomer with a good skill set and analytics that they can work with. He may not be a plus defender at second but hopefully he’s adequate. He discovered some uncommon pop which is a huge plus for a second baseman and they probably think they can fix his missing in the strike zone.

I have relatives in DC. Their fan base detests Dominic. He was a punch line in the beltway.

Personally I wish we would find a way to extend Adames. Doesn’t look like we will with Burnes/Boras and Woody took himself out of that conversation with his injury. With all the young players coming up, you can control a big chunk of production on the roster at low expense. As much as Adames’ hit tool can be aggravating, bat him 6th until he proves otherwise. He brings intangibles like leadership and clubhouse presence (positive, competitive attitude). We may be small market but we are still a MLB team that will need to pay core players. Now if we can get an overpay on a trade from someone, that’s different as is if he’s not willing to sign unless it’s absurd money for a .215 hitter.

Very happy with the Murphy hire. I am not buying all the angst and arguments that it’s boring. He’s reputed to have a strong presence as a leader and has player support and respect. He has a long track record of developing talent and that’s precisely what we need. We have a long list of young players who need development and he was as good as anyone on the list in that respect. I also like the continuity aspect. He knows our pipeline well and with where we are in our cycle of promoting young talent, I think we 100% made the right choice. Do I think we take a step back next year? Yes I do and I’m ok with it although I hope we stay competitive. We’ve proven that we have the best organization in the division and keeping Murphy in place allows us to continue that. You take a step back and then potentially two steps forward in a year or two if we get more young pitching. I suspect much of the top of our next draft or two will be college pitchers with high spin rates. I also find any criticism of his age to be laughable. As long as his health is fine, and every single human on earth has that issue, there’s no reason why he couldn’t comfortably manage for five years if desired. Regarding Weeks, Drew Olsen has some great thoughts. He said Weeks is all about winning and is as competitive of an athlete as he ever covered. He was also a strong and key leader when he was a player. Olsen told a story that Braunie was in the dugout complaining about the shadows with the roof open and Weeks stood up and laid into him that they had to deal with it. The other players thought effectively Weeks just chewed out our biggest star and it was effective and obviously made an impression. I am much happier with Murphy than I would have been a retread like Mattingly or an outside guy who is unproven and could exacerbate brain drain in a very well run organization. Let’s keep it going. Let’s not pretend that Craig didn’t rely heavily on Murphy. They were joined at the hip. These are all pluses IMO. Maybe if we were in a different circumstance or stage in our roster cycle a guy like Gabe Kapler would have fit. But for where we are today, I think Murphy was the right hire.

I’m not going to pretend that I’d ever focused on Dunn before today but I love the move from a risk/reward standpoint. No guarantees here but I love that our analysts liked enough to focus on him. This is the type of move that we can make and get excess value from. Moore and Mendez may make it but I always thought they were overrated and I like Dunn’s potential more. I have always been quality over quantity and I really like the move.

Regarding Mark, we can blame him if you wish but we’ve been run really well for a number of years. We used to overpay for the Braden Loopers and Jeff Suppans. I don’t think that’s the answer. If we overpay we end up in quicksand for mediocrities. It’s not so much being cheap as it is keeping flexibility and not spending on talent that’s not really worth it. Keep your powder dry and deploy resources without crippling you in a way that removes all flexibility. It has worked and I’m fine with passing the likes of Suppan, Looper and Lohse. Look for market inefficiencies (e.g., juco arms) and more reliable bets. In the 1990s we drafted high on super high risk arms and overspent on mediocre free agents. Result was prolonged losing with no hope. We have lost Stearns and Counsell. To me, what we need to be sure about now is retaining our remaining organizational intelligence. Look at our drafts before and after Tod Johnson’s arrival in 2017. For those who would always defend the prior drafting regimes because of crapshoot type arguments, we now have an HP former executive who has a highly competent process and the results have been outstanding undercutting the prior defenses. Similarly, look at the approach with Latin America. We have a top farm system now with a steady stream of talent on the cusp. Look at player development with things like the pitching lab and the developing of catchers with Charlie Greene’s group. Yes, we lost Stearns and CC. We can take both of their tenures and pick apart a ledger of good moves and bad moves. But IMO that’s beside the point. We’ve had an infrastructure and organizational mindset that has been the real secret sauce. Now, if we start having a brain drain in our drafting department, Latin American scouting regime and player development, then I will get really concerned. That will be tough to replicate. Mark has the opportunity to keep all of that intact. I think he’s smart enough to realize that.