KeithStone53151

Hiura needs a full year just to work of defense if nothing else. I think Braun finds a way to be "healthier" (no, that is not a PED dig) if they put a team around him that is truly capable of challenging for more than a one game playoff. Either way, if Santana does not get regular at bats his value is going to fall. Couple that with the fact that this team needs more pitching and I believe the absolute right move is to trade. The team has been trying to deal him since the season ended so I have to believe they are in the same frame of mind. Good on Stearns for holding out for the best deal but I still say this is the team (with Santana) that goes to spring training. Have you seen anything to have any gauge on where Hiura is at defensively? He played a bit in instructionals, but not much for any affiliate...so I don't think anyone has any idea where he is at defensively. Him not playing there his final year in college or his first 2 months of pro ball does not automatically equal him needing tons of time at the position.

They worked that into the projection. Santana specifically is projected for something like 300 AB, Thames is also projected for limited PT. I have issues with many of their projections, so it surprises me that they came to such reasonable win totals.

Those numbers look far more reasonable than the crap fangraphs is using. Pitching is still a big issue, and I'm sure there are specific player projections I'll nitpick when I read the whole article, but overall result is reasonable. You can also argue that unless the Cubs add another starter, they got slightly worse(losing arrieta/davis) while 3 teams in the division are likely to improve. Sure they added some solid pieces to replace those guys, but nobody up to the caliber of Arrieta or Davis. Davis > Morrow. Chatwood will probably be a reasonable replacement for Lackey.

Ok I’ll bite. Over the same period of time (Super Bowl era), 8 of the 30 MLB teams are without a World Series Championship (and the two most recent winners had zero prior to those seasons in that era). That’s basically the same 1/3. The difference is that if you look at payroll/market size for the MLB teams with either zero or 1 WS championship during that era it’s pretty clear that the teams with large pocketbooks are able to compete at a high level much more consistently than those with limited resources. Frankly, if you have that level of failure in the NFL, it’s most likely due to the ineptitude of that front office because EVERYONE is on a level competitive playing field. Baseball economics are much different. I remember looking at the last 10 years of playoff teams and comparing to payrolls. The top 3 teams in payroll in a given year made the playoffs something like 75% of the time. Boy I'd sure like it if the Brewers made it half as often as those teams. It's not even arguable really...a salary cap is clearly the most fair option from a competitive balance standpoint, coupling that with a high cap floor(say 90% of the cap) would guarantee the players a strong percentage of revenues. It's a win win for everyone except the big markets that don't want to give up their advantage.

Yeah, Anibal Sanchez isn't worth a big mac with fries...

you ask & I will respond... The average Indian fan would go nuts with the idea of Santana only for Kipnis & Salazar. Every fan (even those not thrilled with Salazar over the past 1.5 seasons) would expect more than 1 piece back for him alone. The question becomes what is the other piece. Kipnis is still a fan favorite so they would expect something for him alone. So I would echo A Swing & a Drive (Tom Hamilton's catch phrase by the way): Santana & Ponce would not be sufficient. Part of my reasoning on that is I don't believe Ponce would be a target for the Tribe. They have a handful of other pitchers being crowded at the AA level pitching wise (the group at high a Lynchburg was very good last season- McKenzie, Bieber, & Civale among them). So if the prospect piece (or pieces) was different, there might be a chance. IMHO if it was Freddy Peralta & a lotto ticket, there might be a chance because the deal could help in the 2018 push (Peralta might be able to assist the 2018 club in the bullpen & the change having Santana). The average Tribe fan would enter a 'wait & see' mode thinking 1) the Tribe got ok value in the trade (everyone wants more) and 2) wondering what would be done with the Tribe salary savings - is there another (non-MKE) deal being made or an extension being signed by someone like Lindor/ Cody Allen/ etc. No way would Peralta be the piece. Being a fan favorite is literally meaningless to the Brewers, that shouldn't give him extra value. It might make the Indians less inclined to trade him...but at the same time we can go get Walker for probably less money, so why bother trading much for Kipnis if they are going to overprice him? This general dilemna is part of why I see the indians taking on some of the money but getting a prospect. I think 1-2 prospects in the caliber of Grisham/Ray/Gatewood/Pennington/ernesto/etc would likely be the added return for both Salazar and Kipnis if the Indians eat $3-5 million per year of his contract. Also, all the general anti-Santana talk you hear is likely teams trying to keep his value low. All GM speak, he's clearly a very valuable player and his upside is higher than either player coming this way...

I think you may need a general reset of expectations when it comes to mlb catchers. Pina was in the top 1/3 of catchers in OPS in 2017 with 751. Also Pina was top 10 in batting average. Defensively, he was top 1/3 in CS% and allowed only 4 PB in over 100 games...a very reasonable rate. I hate using WAR, but add to this that his WAR was roughly top 1/3...and it appears we have a slightly above average catcher. Pina absolutely is a regression candidate, it would be reasonable to find another solid catcher to pair with him. We have 2 guys that could be very solid backups in Vogt and Bandy...I don't see a reason to spend much on an alternative to those 2 guys. As far as catchers and batting stats, the average catching line based on minimum 100 AB was 244/311/399. Pina posted 279/327/424, Vogt 254/281/508, Bandy 207/287/349. Bandy was also much better before falling off a cliff. Brewers compared fairly well to the average MLB catcher and generally you shouldn't expect 800+ ops guys as your catcher. There weren't all that many, and a majority that did only had 200-300 AB...so smaller sample. I agree completely that Pina was spectacular by MLB catcher standards in 2017. My issue is he will be 31 in June and quite literally did nothing except last year. That's a lot to expect a repeat performance. He had a couple good years in AAA, obviously not the same...but it's hard to know how he would have done at this level. And while it's unusual for guys to come on at age 30, it's much more common for catchers to be late bloomers than other positions. I guess for me the question is how good do you think Vogt/Bandy will be? I can understand adding some competition, I can't understand shelling out significant value for Lucroy or prospect value for someone comparable. And I doubt we are going to get a catchers better than Vogt/Bandy for cheap, it's somewhat similar to our 2b dilemna.

I think you may need a general reset of expectations when it comes to mlb catchers. Pina was in the top 1/3 of catchers in OPS in 2017 with 751. Also Pina was top 10 in batting average. Defensively, he was top 1/3 in CS% and allowed only 4 PB in over 100 games...a very reasonable rate. I hate using WAR, but add to this that his WAR was roughly top 1/3...and it appears we have a slightly above average catcher. Pina absolutely is a regression candidate, it would be reasonable to find another solid catcher to pair with him. We have 2 guys that could be very solid backups in Vogt and Bandy...I don't see a reason to spend much on an alternative to those 2 guys. As far as catchers and batting stats, the average catching line based on minimum 100 AB was 244/311/399. Pina posted 279/327/424, Vogt 254/281/508, Bandy 207/287/349. Bandy was also much better before falling off a cliff. Brewers compared fairly well to the average MLB catcher and generally you shouldn't expect 800+ ops guys as your catcher. There weren't all that many, and a majority that did only had 200-300 AB...so smaller sample.

Especially when watching Vogt's defense last year.. ick. Vogt is on a non-guaranteed contract and has said he's specifically working on improving his throwing this offseason. I like the idea of him and Bandy competing for the backup job. Don't discount Vogt's additional value as a lefty hitting catcher.

Yeah, even if the Jays decide to rebuild or semi-rebuild, those two could anchor their rotation for a long time. If the Jays falter early, they are probably better served to re-tool than rebuild. Trade Donaldson, estrada, happ at the deadline as rentals...they can certainly get some good value, especially for Donaldson. Beyond those guys, they have a solid core that won't hit free agency until 2021. It's also amazing how much payroll is going to come off the books for that team after this year. They might have $70-80 million to work with, and should be able to use that to acquire high end SP and gear up for a 2 year run with their current core. If I'm their GM, I see how the first half plays off and sell off the rentals if I falter for prospects, but keep stroman/sanchez etc and spend big on FA. They'll also get more info on some of their super prospects(guerrero/bichette) and see how soon those guys can contribute. It's a bit of a shame on their end that they don't have a bit more payroll wiggle room...they'd have a real shot to contend if they could bring in Arrieta or Darvish.

Yes Bernie is a decent baseball guy but your taking a quote from Dec 2017 when (in absence of other options) the cost to get a player like Domingo Santana would have been higher. Now people have looked at Santana in greater detail & the Brewers impacted (lowered) his value by geting Yelich & Cain. It comes down this: Both players are with risks & flaws. Both are under team control for the same length of time (2018 plus 3 more seasons). The value of pitching is higher than the value of hitting/ power as we just had a record number of home runs hit & 117 players hit 20 or more homers (41 hit for 30+ homers) in the 2017 regular season. I don't buy the Brewers impacted his value bit at all. HH noted that teams lowered their offers for him, but that will only be temporary and is simply GM's trying to posture. As long as multiple teams are seriously involved, we'll get fair value as the team are competing against each other. HH noted 3 obvious teams in the mix, and Arizona should also be considered a team in the mix as the Dbacks have expressed interest in JD Martinez. And if your argument is risk, that's a poor one. Santana hasn't had significant injury issues like Salazar has, and has had a much more consistent professional career. I get that generally pitching > hitting, but both players are relatively equally productive while Santana offers much less risk and more upside than Salazar...and at a cheaper cost. Also, Salazar has one less year of team control...fyi.

Then I predict a deal will not get done. Consider a post from the DSantana thread last week From the MLBTR live chat today https://www.jotcast.com/chat/mlbtr-live ... -2968.html Steve 5:19 Brewers trade Domingo Santana and a prospect to Indians for Danny Salazar..fair trade? Jason Martinez 5:22 Depends on the prospect, I guess. I've been curious about corner OFs being connected to the Indians. Brantley is back. He'll be in LF. Chisenhall missed half the season, but had an .881 OPS and 12 HR. He's the RF. Santana might be an upgrade, but he also might not be. So why trade Salazar for him? So Jason Martinez a 3rd party non-fan of Brewers or Indians is confirming that it takes Santana plus to get Salazar. Now we look to add in Kipnis. Even if his entire contract is picked up by the Brewers, he is not a negative value. Yes, his value decreases the more the Brewers take on, but in the end it doesn't enter the negative area. Hence the Brewer prospect is either upgraded (to a higher/ better level) or a 2nd prospect gets added. Now HH19 yesterday had noted a sizable trade was stuck due to one player & neither side was budging. I could easily see that being a deal with Cleveland. Many fans expressed happiness that DS was sticking to his guns & being a tough negotiator. I'm fine with DS holding his ground. He is looking to make the best deal possible for the Brewers. I expect every GM is looking to make the best deal for his team. DS is valuing at one level. Cleveland (or the other team) is valuing at a different level. Eventually a deal gets made or the sides walk away & look for other trade partners. The biggest concern is that a relationship is not completely ripped up so the sides can work together in the future. "My other target for the #Indians this offseason would be Domingo Santana of the #Brewers. I think he would fit very nicely in the Tribe's outfield. He hits right-handed and has upside remaining. Again-Salazar plus two a prospect may begin some valid discussions." Pleskoff isn't the greatest source, but he's a decent baseball guy and sees Santana having more value than Salazar. I think those putting Salazar ahead of Santana are ignoring significant injury history/risk.

We have 3 serviceable catchers for 2 spots. I wonder if we are looking for someone serviceable and with option(s). Bandy is likely to be the odd man out and will probably be able to find work as a backup if he isn't kept...I don't think he'd wind up in our AAA. I think there's enough competition as is at that spot, I'm not sure why we are looking at catcher unless it's for AAA depth. I'm not sure Nottingham would be ready to fill in if we had a May injury.

I think if the Brewers are expected to eat all of Kipnis's salary, his deal comes pretty close to negative value. But with the way pitching seems to be valued this year, though, I'd argue that Salazar may have a bit more value than Santana. If that's the case, it might be a straight 2-for-1 deal. I guess it wouldn't surprise me to see low-level minor leaguers changing teams as well. I don't imagine it would be anything of big significance, though. I think the deal would end up being Santana + for Kipnis + Salazar...with the indians eating maybe $4-5 million/year. I could see the prospect or 2 the Indians get back being somewhat decent. Maybe Bickford and Grisham or Pennington and Henry...someone with some upside for sure. I get that we are probably giving up a touch more value than we should, that's just how I see the deal playing out.

I don't think anyone has a feel for how good or bad he is at 2b. Hard to pass judgement on whether he'll be better or worse than Weeks until then. It is reasonable to question whether his defense will be ready in 2018 though regardless of the bat.

I'm going to avoid the initial part and focus on the latter. I couldn't agree more on Santana. I think the market is going to fluctuate wildly once the dominoes start to fall(at least 3 of the big 4 SP will be signed by opening day, guaranteed). Going into the season with the options we have is not an enormous issue. Sure it will suck to send Phillips to AAA, but that lineup is that much more stacked with Santana in there. If we bring in Walker or Kipnis, we are going to have a crazy solid 1-6 in the lineup however you set it...with Pina and Arcia 7 and 8. And Arcia again is probably more likely to improve on his 2017 numbers than regress given his age/prospect pedigree...we have the potential to have a stacked lineup 1-8.

As far as Hiura, there's an outside chance he could force his way by August/September...but even then I don't know. He'll probably open in high A, he'd probably have to hit like crazy the entire season to have a chance. He's certainly a talented guy. I'm kinda anticipating him mashing high A, getting a quick promotion, and running into a bit of adversity in AA. I don't see him as a complete player ready to play at the MLB level just yet. As for 2b targets, aiming high would be Walker/Kipnis...and I think it's more likely than unlikely that we get one of those 2 guys. If we can't get them, I think we roll with inhouse options. Those are the only 2 guys I see available that are good enough to push the upside of villar to the bench. Harrison isn't good enough, castro isn't good enough.

It seems to line up too perfectly to not work. The only hold up I see is the Brewers valuing Archer more than Salazar and exhausting all efforts to acquire Archer in a Santana package before giving up and moving on to a Salazar and Kipnis deal. I'll be honest...the Kipnis portion of the deal is the most surprising. Depending on the money involved coming back to Milwaukee, I would have to wonder if Walker isn't the better option. We also don't know what Walker's asking price is. It is certainly higher than Frazier's as he is clearly a superior player and is higher up on the defensive spectrum. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a 3 year deal on the table...maybe from us that's on hold until we figure out pitching.

I could buy that...that and/or how much money the Indians need to eat of Kipnis salary.

I agree, which is why I think Santana is the man without a home. While he would be a nice bench bat, that would be a waste of value. He's another guy that should be playing nearly every day, and that just isn't going to happen the way the team's outfield is currently constructed. Agree. As currently constructed, those 3 need to play every day, or nearly every day. Say 150+ each. And Thames is a plus plus bat vs RHP. Which leaves Braun with like 80 starts and Phillips with zero. Seems something really does have to give. I think it will give...just need patience. The market will adjust in our favor as the FA pitchers start falling off the board. Whether we get prospects or a SP for Santana, we'll get good value. Especially considering the wild demands of JD Martinez...whereas Santana is basically a poor man's JD Martinez, except that he's 25 and has upside.

+1 The forum hit a record high yesterday, and I've seen a ton of new posters lately...which can largely be attributed to HH.

You really don't think GM's/front offices see the results of the long term deals into players late 30s? Ellsbury, pujols, zimmerman, sandoval, kemp, crawford, hamilton, I could keep going. Every one of these players screwed over the team that signed them. I get that these guys were vastly underpaid for their production earlier in their career, but does that mean players should get wildly overpaid to be below replacement in their mid-late 30s? These bad contracts inhibit a teams ability to compete, and inevitably can get GM's fired. It would be much more fair to change the structure of team control so players are paid more in their primes but in a way that maintains reasonable competitive balance, but there isn't an easy answer to that.

What they feel they deserve is the contracts from 3-5 years ago that are now mostly horrible contracts for the teams that signed them. Boras can say whatever he wants, most deals into a players late 30s end horribly for the team. And it doesn't change the fact that the players collectively bargained for the deal in place...and them colluding is completely not OK. This is a weird year for free agents, if these guys were smart...they'd bet on themselves on a 1 year deal for $25-30 million and take part in the frenzy that will be the 2018 offseason. I'm sure teams would line up for a deal like that. Heck Darvish could probably sign 2/50 with an opt out after year one...protects himself in case of injury but lets him hit the market in 2018.

Collusion among Agents/players seems more likely to me than collusion by front offices this offseason. The front offices limiting spending makes sense for so many reasons. These players holding out for the demands reported is extremely aggravating and illogical.

Jake is a Boras client, that clown probably still thinks he can get $200 million