KeithStone53151
-
Posts
7,435 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by KeithStone53151
-
You have 6 question marks and Peralta...you missed Ashby. You're also literally 7 deep heading into spring training, with 2 being relievers last year, two coming off serious injury, one having a breakout after being unsuccessful for a long time, Miley who is very injury prone, and then Peralta who has also been injury prone. The odds of getting to opening day with 5 healthy starters aren't as high as they should be...I feel like in most cases we have at least 4-5 reserve options or not a rotation full of concerns. Beyond health, the odds of having 5 starters capable of going 5 innings a start with an ERA under 5 on opening day seems close to zero at this point
-
I wasn't being serious about Monasterio. I see both of your point on Gasser but simply disagree. It shouldn't be a consideration at all in my opinion considering the range of outcomes and potential value in 2030. The only focus should be 2024 considering Gasser, we'll see what happens.
-
I didn't realize that Taylor was gone until I checked on this. So Taylor(who has more value than Houser) and Houser combined got us a lotto ticket arm that won't pitch this year after coming of TJ. I don't think Houser having 2 years of team control vs 1 really changed anything here. You're talking about a miniscule amount of value here. The cost of holding him down a couple weeks is also miniscule, aside from the fact that I don't know how in the world we're going to fill innings without him in the rotation unless we bring in someone else or ashby is healthy. But that's really not the point, the likely value of maintaining that extra year of team control is so miniscule(and reasonably likely to be zero) that it shouldn't be a consideration.
-
What's the present value of maybe 20%(odds we keep him for his entire team control) of $10 million in 2030? Also, don't think I missed the fact that you tried subtly shifting my stance from "back-end starter" to "number 5 starter". I know doing so improves your argument but there's a difference between back-end(implying #4/5) and number 5.
-
Gasser has a low 90s fastball and currently 1 plus secondary pitch. That's a pretty back-end starter arsenal. Yes, if he improves his arsenal he could be better. I'm not going to bet on a 24, going on 25 year old adding a ton more velocity or significantly improving pitches...which is his primary path beyond back of rotation starter. Burnes did it(effectively added 3 pitches in one offseason), it was incredibly impressive and he proved it can be done...but he's the exception, not the rule...and he has incredible arm talent. Bottom line, thinking about 2030 with Gasser is quite foolish and shouldn't be a consideration at this point. Next year, thinking about 2031 with Miz may very well be a consideration the way things are trending.
-
I did this fairly quickly, there might be better examples. I found a handful of guys that were at least decent or better prospects in their respective systems and had at least 5 starts at each level(i think all had at least 10). I also added Gasser for a comparable, who obviously didn't pitch at the mlb level. The big outlier is Olson, aside from him...everyone was a fair amount worse in almost all metrics from AAA to MLB. Sure, a low-mid 4s era has plenty of value...but let's not kid ourselves that Gasser is beating down the door here. He's probably ready, but he's not a Burnes or Woodruff that you kick someone to the curb to make room for.
-
How many guys that project to the back end of a rotation, actually hit their projection and maintain it for 7 years? You know who else projected to the back end of a rotation...Ethan Small, Adrian Houser, Eric Lauer. It's fairly uncommon for back-end rotation types to hold on to their back of the rotation role for 7 years...planning for it is stupid. I get it, a lot of people want to look smart by being the one to point out service time manipulation...it simply doesn't or shouldn't apply in all cases.
-
Interesting, tough to quantify the impact but seems reasonable to have had an impact. I wonder if there are any examples of good prospects pitching half or a portion of a season in the IL last year and then half a season at the mlb level...and how they translated. That would probably be the best indicator even if the sample is probably pretty small if it even exists.
-
Others have pointed to the fact that Gasser was better than most of his peers in the IL. That said, that's only a piece to the puzzle and isn't necessarily an indicator of future success...nor does it scream "beating down the door". Also, why is everyone so obsessed with considering service time manipulation? Gasser projects as a back-end starter. it's one thing to manipulate service time on burnes, woodruff, chourio, etc...budding stars. It's really shouldn't be a huge focus for a guy like Gasser, who if he falls even a little short of his projection...probably will get cut before he maxes out his service time. What's next, should we send down monasterio to make sure we manipulate his service time and get 7 years out of him instead of 6?
-
That's fair context to a degree. Why was IL so tough on pitchers? I know I've heard the PCL is very hitter friendly, but haven't heard the same of the IL. Him ranking well amongst his peers at this level is not necessarily an indicator of success at the next level. Maybe there just weren't a lot of quality arms at that level this year, too many Ethan Small's. I don't know the answer to that honestly, but I'm not going to simply look at how he rated against his peers at a level as an indicator of success when the numbers in general looked solid/unspectacular without more context. Hopefully, the answer is there were a lot of demon hitting prospects in the IL driving up the pitching numbers. But if he's only doing solid against AAAA hitters...it's not going to be good when he starts facing Arenado and Goldschmidt.
-
There's a bit of a difference between Gasser and Burnes/Woodruff from a prospect caliber perspective. I think I'm a bit lower on Gasser than others, but he definitely doesn't have the arm talent of Burnes/Woodruff...I'd like to think that really isn't up for debate. He may end up being an effective starter, but not really the guy you focus on service time games with. Especially considering his age...might be a different story if he was 21/22.
-
3.79 ERA, 1.278 WHIP...those aren't "beating on the door" numbers. I recognize his good k rate and that his bb rate improved in the second half. I'll also add, the second half improvement helps his case a lot. I'd feel a lot better going into the season if we had one more established arm, and Gasser was basically competing with Junis/Rea/Hall/Ashby's health...for the last 2 spots. Gasser opening in AAA temporarily wouldn't be the end of the world if he didn't win the competition with those other 3 guys, and frankly him not beating out those guys would say a lot anyways. As is, we kinda need those guys to fill 3 spots and that's a very optimistic outlook.
-
I don't know how we can seriously contemplate entering the season without adding a starting pitcher. Peralta, Miley, Rea...? Is Rea really our 3rd best starter? I can't think of anyone else that's a locked in starter. Hall and Junis will try to transition from relief. Ashby may start if truly healthy. Bryce Wilson was real good as long reliever and should contend for a rotation spot simply based on how bad the options are. Carlos Rodriguez and Gasser are quality options in the high minors but neither were really beating down the door to close the year. I feel like we don't have enough options for early in the season. Gasser/Rodriguez aren't realistic for super early in the season, Ashby is not certain to be ready for the rotation. There really aren't a lot of other names up there, we're 2 injuries away from having a real problem covering innings...and that's not even considering the fact that quality in general is a real problem beyond probably Peralta. A lot of yikes with the rotation heading into the season, which is inevitable considering Woodruff/Burnes are gone. Kinda hard to adequately replace guys that are going to go for $30M+/year in FA.
-
The concept of arbitration is fine, imagine if the people making the decisions had the same intimate understanding of player valuation that the teams have...instead of relying on saves and rbi's and other literally irrelevant metrics to a player's true value. Hader is clearly valued as one of the very best relievers in baseball currently, he'd have significantly more value if he was able to give 90 innings of similar caliber dominance per year instead of 60 but recorded maybe a 25 saves instead of close to 40. Bottom line, the real problem is the decision makers being complete boneheads...that's the correction that needs to happen. Most of the people on this forum are probably better suited to make a call on a players value than anyone who's including saves and rbi's in their consideration for player valuation.
-
None of your descriptions paint an even remotely accurate picture of any of these players, I know I've had this issue with you before where you cherry pick support that fits your narrative but isn't a remotely accurate picture of events. All 3 were either more effective or comparably effective last year than/as Junis and there's more reason to expect success next year in all 3 cases than Junis. Age is basically irrelevant on a one year deal unless you think this is the year it all falls apart for any of those guys. All things being equal, I would take any one of them over Junis and all 5 of my examples are earning at least 1 million less than Junis next year.
-
Now shift Junis to playing in one of the smallest ballparks in baseball, a lot of fly balls that would have died at the track in SF will go over Miller Park fences.
-
Junis is not a back end starter, if he starts...he's a pitching machine as he had been his entire career until he moved to relief. Going down the link I provided previously that you clearly didn't bother to click on, Middleton, Brebbia, Smith, Ottavino, Yates...are a few guys in the $4-6M range that are better options than Junis.
-
I'm with you on this. There are way more scenarios that he doesn't get to 400 than that he does. The primary ones that he gets 400 PA with this team would involve either a Contreras injury, or him demolishing the baseball and forcing himself into the lineup(yes please)...both scenarios also involve us being good enough to not be sellers at the deadline as a good Sanchez and bad Brewers is a 100% trade. I assumed Yelich would DH a fair amount this year considering the young outfielders we have, so I don't really expect him to get even half the DH atbats. I also checked and he does have an extremely limited amount of 1b experience...but I wouldn't expect him to play there much. This seems like the type of add you make at the deadline, where you start filling the bench with veteran regulars that will produce better in limited roles than a traditional bench player. The commitment to Haase is quite small, very real chance he simply gets cut...probably more likely than us rolling 3 catchers and having Haase effectively glued to the bench.
-
Your point is really the primary reason I'm holding out hope that this works out. I look at what he throws, all those sliders is really my primary reason for concern and thinking he's going to get figured out quickly or wear down quickly. 62% is just not sustainable. He was even throwing it 56% of his pitches to LH batters. His sinker and changeup are trash pitches currently, they get demolished by both sides hitters. The Giants are also quite good at pitching development, it's not like he's coming over from the Cubs where there's true hope incompetent development is holding him back. The only way I see this as a potentially good signing, is if we completely punt on the idea of him starting...and can find a way to make his sinker or changeup or both more effective...while being able to throw a crazy amount of sliders and not have his arm explode. I mean, it's really a one year deal, his arm is certainly a ticking time bomb but certainly feasible it holds together this year. I can certainly hope it works out while viewing this as an above market signing on paper.
-
For years we've paid guys like Janis 3-4 million, or we've traded very little for better than him. Junis is neither a quality SP or a high leverage reliever. He'll be a low leverage reliever most likely, unless his arm explodes which with slider usage is likely. Not worth close to 7 mil. The "everything costs 7 million" seems to be your implication and that's just not accurate at all....
-
I had a very lengthy response drafted up explaining why middle relievers don't make 7 million, but then checked and saw we intend on having him start...and threw up in my mouth a little. What in the absolute heck is Matt Arnold doing?!? This dude has had every chance to start and failed miserably. I question whether he can even be an effective reliever beyond being our 5th or 6th best option, dude throws over 60 percent slider...just a matter of time before the league adjusts or his arm explodes. It's actually annoying that Matt Arnold can make such garbage moves, yet he's going to get completely bailed out by a young core putting up a lot of runs this year.
-
For me, this seems like a fine move for a bigger market team to make. For years we've been able to pull guys off the scrap heap and get similar production to what Junis offers. We can't be paying $7 million for a guy to be our 4th or 5th best reliever. I know Junis used to start, you can maybe consider him a multi-inning guy, I just don't see much surplus value here. Seems like at best we are paying market rate and this team can't afford to pay market rate very often and be successful.
-
350 PA is a lot for a utility player...especially if said player missed a chunk of time on the IL. Most regulars don't see 600. WAR also overvalues defense, and worth noting Ortiz is supposed to be a very good defender. It's certainly not like you think you might be swapping in hiura caliber defense but bringing him up.
-
There is a strong possibility in this case that the prospect gurus were way off on ruiz value. That trade Arnold made looks so incredibly stupid for Oakland unless Ruiz had a lot more value than general fan consensus/MLB pipeline thought. Ruiz having more value also makes the hader trade better...assuming that's accurate on ruiz. That said, it certainly seems like we're struggling to sell players as needed for good value. I wonder if the reason we got these 2 players is we chose more MLB ready options to try to maintain a competitive window. Half of MLB at minimum should have been checking in on burnes, its really hard to fathom that we couldn't get better offers. I do wonder if we could have gotten better prospects further from the majors from someone else but chose this package instead.
-
Nowhere did I say either of those things. Look back if you want, you won't find it. I said they are trending towards a bust considering their previous prospect pedigree, and that the Orioles probably don't think he can hit at the MLB level as he wasn't given a chance to play over a guy that posted 607 ops in 350 PA. The upper minors are filled with dudes that can post 800-850 ops in AAA but can't crack 650 at MLB. It would be far from unusual for Ortiz to be similar.
