KeithStone53151

That's partially true. I fully believe the Brewers have made money every single year, even 2014 with their $110 million payroll. Then factor in the $70ish million payrolls the last 2 years while revenue streams have increased substantially, and they surely made boatloads the last 2 years. Profitability isn't an issue. Cash flow could be an issue, but as has been noted...the value of the franchise has gone up immensely. If cash flow was an issue, they would have absolutely no problem borrowing if needed and still maintain reasonable ratios related to debt. I don't think anyone should anticipate a $200 million payroll even in our craziest spending year, but I suspect payroll could comfortably go higher than many of you think.

I agree they have a glut of outfielders, so Broxton may not fit there. Many of those are LH and not all that good, replacing smith with Broxton is an upgrade on both sides of the ball...but I could understand if they wanted to roll with their current OF. As far as Aguilar, he got his first real taste of MLB last year, he had a career like 60 atbats over 3 years up until 2017. The guys you mentioned are getting older and worse, and haven't been nearly as good as Aguilar. They will also be more expensive, even if they are kept after a minor league deal they'll surely get more than $600k. I'm not trying to say Aguilar would be the centerpiece to an Odorizzi deal, I'm saying Odorizzi's value isn't as high as most seem to think and Aguilar absolutely has some value. It's completely illogical for a contending team with a hole at DH/1b to not want to give a small piece of the farm and instead opt to pay an old aging vet $2-3 million to put up 100-200 lower OPS than Aguilar. The Rays could be a contending team, but you could widen the range and see that Aguilar could be of value to quite a few AL teams.

I think that's a light package for Odorizzi. He's still a solid MLB pitcher even with some recent injuries/not great years whereas Aguilar and Broxton are still guys that teams know we may have to DFA/option since demand isn't that high. Flip it around - would you take some team's 4th or 5th OF and platoon 2B + one lower ceiling prospect for Davies? Slightly different arbitration situations, but you get the idea. Look how Odorizzi is trending, and in a pitcher friendly environment. The ERA didn't look terrible but look at FIP, bb rate, hr/fb rate, LD rate, hard contact rate, and then his absurdly unsustainable BABIP on the year. If he had posted an upper 3's or lower 4s ERA with those other measures remaining more consistent with 2015-2016 levels...completely different conversation. Maybe then it's Broxton, Aguilar, Ortiz for Odorizzi. The reality on Odorizzi, he was closer to a 5 ERA pitcher than 2015-16 Odorizzi...he was extremely lucky from a results standpoint given the trends noted above. After looking at him further, I'm not sure I'd want Odorizzi and would be more inclined to take my chances on Woodruff.

Brewers were in a lot different place when they traded Lind for those rookie leaguers. Much more a "win now" philosophy. That said, we have no idea if Broxton for Corbin is even an option. If it were truly a case of either/or, considering where the team is at currently, I'm taking the lower upside sure thing over the potential, but very unlikely high upside The type of return that Broxton is likely to get, I think you kinda have to assume Stearns did the best he could. If he gets 2 young 17 year olds, a solid relief arm, a 1 year expensive mid-back rotation rental like Corbin...whatever the return is I'm sure Stearns will have done fine. This isn't a Santana/phillips situation where it's fairly important that if either player moves...we get starting pitching back in return.

If it's for Odorizzi, Aguilar could be a piece to that puzzle. Currently the Rays don't have much for a DH, maybe Dickerson. Their 1b is also a LH hitter and he kinda sucks. At worst, Aguilar could start all games against lefties for them and get some time against righties as both DH and 1b. Aguilar + Broxton + Houser for Odorizzi. Then trade Santana to the Red Sox for prospects(Groome+)...use your prospects at the deadline to get a high end pitcher if needed. I'm sure we could get decent packages from other teams for Santana, it's just hard to want to deal with any other GM when Dombrowski is out there.

As far as the deadline goes, any of the starters that we are being linked to could be available at the deadline with some additional added names. Archer, Duffy, Salazar, Stroman, Hamels, Manaea, Odorizzi, Teheran, etc. If offers aren't ideal, it would be a reasonable strategy to simply trade Santana for prospects, trade for Corbin or sign a lower tier FA, and then look to add the big name at the deadline.

This guy claims the Brewers don't expect to sign a FA, SP acquisition will be via trade. We'll see, signing a FA now would void any credibility he has.

I don't think the Yankees are just going to get those guys. It isn't like in the 90s when they could sign whoever they wanted. The bidding is going to be tremendous, I also see players signing much earlier than this offseason. I think teams will be way more aggressive but there will only be so much money to go around. There could still be some super teams created though, players have shown they'll take discounts to be on good teams.

HH has said there's a big meeting scheduled for sometime today, nothing else. I get the idea we won't see much activity until the end of the weekend at the earliest, or until Darvish signs. He's really holding up the show.

I'd be down with that. Perhaps this is the "HOT" smaller move speculated about last week? Arizona is hot, right? The straws I'm grasping at are getting pretty short. I wouldn't hate having this available as a fallback, Corbin could tide us over for a year while we see what we have in Nelson's return/Burnes/Woodruff. I'd prefer to target better pitchers though even if it means giving up more.

The Giants, Cardinals, Diamondbacks, Mariners, Tigers, Rangers, Orioles, Padres, and Phillies are some teams that could get seriously involved in the bidding on at least some of the big guys. I honestly wouldn't doubt seeing close to 2 billion worth of contracts signed next offseason. Heck Harper/Kershaw/Machado might get 1 billion on their own.

Thinking that way, they probably know there's no chance we'll be able to compete in next years free agent market. Luxury tax will be meaningless for any teams capable of going over it.

It has been pretty firmly established by multiple sources that "stand pat" is not an option whatsoever, so advocating for that is a fools errand. Obviously Stearns sees a need to strengthen the rotation, and he will find some way to do it. It's a matter of who they get, and what they give up. I didn't say "stand pat", I said make sure you're getting good value, which Yu and Archer are not. Maybe you could get Moustakas and Walker for the same price with only one comp pick, move Shaw to 1b, trade Thames, and trade Santana for Salazar+. Just spit-balling obviously but the point is that you have to "take what the defense gives you" and be patient, and I'm confident Stearns will do that. Look how many people got frustrated when they didn't sign any $6-8m relievers. Cain only cost $16m and is probably worth more than any 3 of those relievers combined. I mean he didn't get much more than Wade Davis, did he? They will be disciplined and wait for good opportunities, which Yu and Archer are not. I don't think anybody is anticipating we don't add a 5th and open the season with Suter starting, well maybe clancy but he'd be it. Some people think we add 2 high end pieces. Some think we make 1 trade, some think 1 FA signing. The beauty is we still have flexibility to make a few moves that can help us. I think whatever move we make needs to be very high end. Stroman, darvish, maybe arrieta. Woodruff could be packaged with Santana in this trade if we end up adding 2 starters, we should also consider looking at 3 way trade options as there are a few teams with good SP that are rebuilding and would want prospects in value versus getting Santana.

Well, that's something. Likely means there are potential moves on the table, and the Brewers brass needs to decide to sign off on them. Ball could be in their court now. Of course, could be a planning meeting for Spring Training logistics, too. But its more fun to think a big deal is on the horizon. With Darvish holding things up, I would look at this more as a strategic planning type thing than anything. My own speculation of course. They probably have a feel for the type of moves they can make and what the offers are going to look like at this point, and things will probably start moving fast as soon as Darvish makes a decision. It is possible there's a deal on the table and they are debating whether to take it. What I'd give to be a fly on the wall in Stearns office...

As much as I dislike it, this is absolutely accurate. Everything they've done all offseason, every rumor, points to us using Hader in the bullpen. The announcement was merely confirming what was already obvious. Even if we have 2 significant SP injuries in camp, Hader won't get a spot. Guerra/Gallardo/Suter/Wilkerson/etc would be in line at that point. Heck the way FA has gone we may try to sign a back end guy to a 1 year deal...there will probably be plenty left.

Honest question: how many guys throw 95 MPH their whole career? How many guys throw hard sliders their whole career and 95 MPH that don't slow down or get Tommy John? I realize that Archer is only 29, but there's a real possibility that his arm starts to deteriorate in the near future. Cost absolutely factors in for me. Everyone can get excited about Archer only making $7 million instead of Lynn getting $17 for instance, but you also have to factor in that you are giving up Burnes, who, (I realize this is also a risk) will essentially come up with a 6 year, $20 million contract if he performs well. I'm open to Archer only in a very specific type of deal, and one that absolutely doesn't involve Burnes. For me, ortiz/bickford/santana are all spare parts if we build the team how we want to build it. I'll do an archer trade for that grouping of players with some smaller pieces added. If Tampa demands Burnes, we don't need to make that move. If the plan is to get a FA SP and trade for a SP, the trade could be a slightly lower aim like Duffy or Salazar and still field a solid team.

In that situation, if Braun is healthy, it's a tossup between Yelich and Braun. Cain is a somewhat close 3rd and I guess maybe shaw would be an extremely distant 4th. Not that the rest of our team are bad hitters, those guys are just premium hitters while the rest of our guys are very good at best.

Let the speculation begin ... Can you say whether said pitcher is a starter or a reliever? If reliever, I'm going with Brad Hand. Starter? Umm, I dunno. Teheran or Matt Harvey? If so, blah. Relief. Follow tea leaves. Very small talk does not acquire an impact starter or 2. If that's their goal, there's zero need for a starter. Adding 2 impact arms... oy, bye bye farm and Santana. If we leave with Burnes Peralta Phillips Huira Lutz Erceg I'll be happy enough I guess. Woodruff Ray Ortiz Dubon nice knowing ya. I'm only comfortable including Woodruff in a trade for a high end rotation piece IF we also sign one of the big 4 SP. Say Darvish/Arrieta, Archer, Anderson, Davies, Chacin...with Burnes/Nelson as 2nd half depth and guys like Suter/Wilkerson/Guerra/Gallardo as early SP depth if it's needed. It would be a big problem to need that depth early on though.

Not having to throw as much could help with any lingering thumb issues. And less running in the outfield could help to some degree with the calf, though as noted he'll still have to run the bases. And every swing should bring nerves about straining an oblique/intercoastal...though he hasn't had as many issues with that lately. You can probably pencil Braun in for 140ish games if he deals with no injuries, more likely is in the 130s somewhere. With the players we have, we should give him a day or two off per week periodically to help keep him fresh all season. Hopefully we'll need him in October.

I'm strongly anti-Arrieta, but I think I'd be willing to take him on a 3 year deal that looked like that. I expect he'll get 4-5 years minimum though, once Darvish stops slowing down free agency...

You make an excellent point about staying hungry, that's really one of the most important factors in a free agent signing...being damn sure you aren't signing a guy that's going to coast(pujols).

Mets or Braves would be my guess. Seth Lugo or Brandon McCarthy if Braves kick in some money. Those guys aren't high end starters. Teheran if it's the Braves(who were in on Yelich fwiw). Maybe Nola from the Phillies, but I doubt it considering Santana doesn't fit there and the Phillies are ramping up to contention probably as soon as this year. I don't see the Mets punting and giving up any of their pitching, so no Degrom. Could it be Taillon? Straily? Somebody on the Dodgers to clear a spot for them to get Darvish(probably wood or hill in this unlikely event)? If it's a reliever, maybe Iglesias? Hand? Barraclaugh? Iglesias would cost a fortune, but imagine him, Knebel, Hader on the back end? That's a filthy 3 headed relief monster.

I stand corrected, I think Plush was working off my numbers and I was lazy in how I found what I thought Illinois tax rate was. Apparently tax rate is meaningless if not a benefit for Illinois. I guarantee cost of living is lower in Wisconsin vs Illinois though, probably matters more than the tax rates ever would.

I think that's the kind of money Neil Walker is looking at too. If you could grab Walker and Lucroy for less than $10 million per season combined, sign me up for both. Oh I highly doubt it. Walker still has the Mets and Brewers at minimum as teams vying for his services. I wouldn't doubt Walker is being held up by Darvish, maybe he thinks the Brewers have more cash to throw his way if we strike out on high end FA pitching. I feel like Lucroy can probably still get $20-30 million, I have no idea what's holding up the FA position player market. On the pitching side it's clearly Darvish, and I highly highly doubt Santana is factoring much into the position player side. Maybe mildly on the 2nd tier of OF but that's it, and Martinez is impacting that as well.

Illinois has higher state taxes, a 3ish% difference in state tax on say $140 million is substantial. If you went to the Cubs board you'd see they think Darvish is going to sign with them for 4/$90...LOL. $120-130 is probably the low end of what he might get. Actually...no. A 3% difference(I went 7%/10%) is an incredible $2mil difference on $70mil. Only half his contract is made in Chicago/Milwaukee. I didn't realize they split it like that. Close to $1 million/year is a bit more substantial than close to $500k/year. Maybe that money is irrelevant at the end of the day anyways. As much as players whine about slow free agency and teams not being competitive, don't they have themselves to blame to some degree for taking lesser contracts to play on winning teams? Apparently Duensing was offered $10.5/2 years but took $7. Heyward took less money to go to the Cubs(thank goodness!). There are tons of examples of this, no different than the NBA with Golden State acquiring a dream team and the old big 3 with the Heat. The good players will take discounts to create super teams, and with those factors in play the players wonder why certain teams don't bother trying to sign big free agents?