MrTPlush

To me, it would be the opposite. A team with a very high payroll knows they can get a player who they're actually getting good value for and costs peanuts compared to the other players they've signed who are no longer producing commensurate with their salary. Lucroy is the yin to their yang, so-to-speak. If Luc were a FA now, then I'd agree with you that a team with an already ridiculous payroll might be looked to go the cheaper route on a catcher. That being said, any team can afford his salary so he should be looked at a bargain across the league. I agree...Lucroy has value to the Red Sox because his cheap salary would give great value while staying under the luxury tax. That or close to the luxury tax. I am not sure exactly where they stack up in that regard. I don't think it is a fit, but his salary is still attractive to them.

Incorrect. There is a plausible chance that he will be, especially considering what $31 mil will buy you in seven years. I wouldn't say likely, but saying "of course he won't" is easy when you don't have to back it up for seven years. Looks like he has an opt-out after three years, so it might be another team's worry anyway. I'd say the chances are so low n one should be expecting him to do it. Pretty sure teams are aware the last few years of these mega contracts won't look good. That is just a part of how it works. Who was the last pitcher to put up such a stellar stats? Even with some inflation to earn $31million is going to take one heck of a season. Outside of the steroid era starters usually don't fare well once they hit 33-35. I realize he could be good...but realistically no one is going to bet a dollar on him being worth $31mil at 36 years old.

No of course he won't. That isn't why teams sign players to massive deals. It is for now and the near future. Those 36/37 year old season are part of the down side to the contract.

If the Red Sox wanted Lucroy and wanted him long term it would be an interesting team. The trade would be a classic big market type kind of move. Spending money on know a and dumping the prospects. The Red Sox would immediately be better and if they went and added their ace in FA(who looks to be David Price) there team would see huge improvements. I don't know if they would want Garza though and very possible they would just prefer to role with Swihart because he had a nice debut. I feel like the Brewers could do better, but Swihart/Owens are MLB ready so that is some value in itself.

I get the Tulowitzki comparison, but Tulowitzki is incredibly good at the most premium position in the game. With his production at the position he is at that contract is probably a bargain at $20mil a year. I can't say any of this for Braun. If healthy Braun is a really good player who is probably worth his contract. Problem is Braun now has two BIG injury concerns moving forward. Back problems are always a big concern. We don't know its effects yet, but I would be scared if I was considering a trade for him. Then he has that thumb issue which is a 24/7 365 days a year type problem. I'd be really worried on how he will age as he already has struggles staying on the field. When you start thinking about it there are so many issues with Braun before we even get to the PED past and how that effects his value.

I don't see Braun's PED use being a reason why a team will not trade for him. Braun's contract and his injuries are more of a deterrent for a team to trade for Braun than his PED use. PED use isn't much of a problem. The fact he isn't marketable like he once was and the fact he is widely NOT loved makes his off the field value next two zero. The PEDs themselves aren't a real issue, but what they created is a bit of an issue. I am not saying no team isn't going to trade for him just because he isn't marketable, but it sure doesn't make you want to trade for him now does it?

I know what you are trying to say, but neither Smith or Jeffress is an Aroldis Chapman. They are just good, but not great relievers. Smith and Jeffress both have not so great splits too so that doesn't really help their cases either. Will Smith can be inconsistent at times and go through very rough stretches, not something I would want closing. Jeffress has the high heat one would like in a closer, but I really question his command. Some days it is on and other days he is just chucking the ball and hope the batters miss. No one is going to lose their mind if we never let one close. Neither has the resume or stuff to demand a closing gig.

You guys do understand the Brewers are a business and have investors right? You can't just say, "Oh well it won't really effect us competing so who cares if we make players $5mil more expensive when we can avoid it." Saving $10mil on Garza or avoiding high arbitration numbers with Will Smith is the smart business thing to do. Do you typically spend extra money just because you can? Do you get the expensive soap vs. the cheap stuff just because you can? I would assume no...and if you are then NEVER start a business.

The list is painful mess and inaccurate, but it is interesting both Flores and Betancourt are analytically liked.

I think 99% of our minor league players are considered pretty untouchable. It really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to trade any of them unless it is for other controllable players. Arcia isn't the only one that is pretty safe from being traded. I wouldn't trade Phillips, Hader, Harrison, Ponce, Medeiros, etc etc etc etc

I'd rather pay David Price $30mil...or whatever Greinke gets paid.

Matt Garza will be in the starting rotation if he is healthy and on this team. Moving him to the pen would be dumb in my mind. Just dump him at that point.

Total speculation. No actual news here. Realistically though it all depends on the price. How could anyone really comment unless we know that price. I'd role the dice depending on the price. If he breaks out here we can trade him for a big prospect load.

Jose Fernandez has Scott Botas as an agent. You won't be signing him to an extension for anything less than a market value.

Yes it sounds like a possibility it they sign Park and he actually wants to do it.

Awesome trade for the Brewers. Too bad Twins don't have a spot for Lind.

Except they've already traded future value in Sardinas and Sneed for current value in Villar and Flores so Stearns isn't going about building a farm system, he's trying to improve the product on the field while making it younger at the same time.. Fernandez is a young ace who'd make them serious contenders immediately if they didn't have to sacrifice much from the present roster. If they could get him for a package like Peralta, Lopez, Santana, Houser and Lara, I'd think long and hard about it because they'd still have Arcia, Phillips and Hader on the cusp of their careers. Count me not interested in Puig either. Except Flores and Villar are controlled for like 5 years. That and we didn't give up huge value. We gave up a garbage utility bat and a pitcher we have a dozen similar ones of. Fernandez would take Arcia, Phillips, Lopez, and Hader....heck maybe more. How would that make sense?

This keeps coming up. It's the Scouting Director, not the GM, who runs the draft -- that's Ray Montgomery & not David Stearns. Assuredly the GM is in the room, doubtlessly he's had several conversations with the Scouting Director in terms of learning what's up and imparting his thoughts on organizational direction (and you'd figure he & the SD are pretty close to being on the same page or else the SD would be someone else), and you have to figure he's aware of the biggest names. But the draft is the Scouting Director's baby. The GM doesn't run in the start calling the shots. GM will always have final say on a pick. Obviously when you get into later rounds the GM will just listen, but when it comes to the first pick Stearns will definitely have a say if he wants. If he wants a catcher he is going to get one. I agree Stearns won't be running out and deciding the 15th round pick, but the first couple he should and most likely will have a lot of say in who is picked. Those first couple picks are a big deal right away and Stearns is the one building this team. He needs to get the guys he wants.

Heard the same thing when Mark A. and the ownership group bought the Brewers. I hope Mark learned his lesson and lets the baseball people handle the baseball stuff. The real concern isn't how Attanasio acts in a rebuild, but what he does once the team gets close to competing. I have no concerns with Attanasio letting him build big farm system. I can't say the same about not dumping those prospects for MLB talent when competitive vibes hit Milwaukee.

I really won't have an opinion on Stearns until he goes through an entire off season. Will he get something decent for Lind? Will he trade Lucroy or hold onto him? Is he going to sign some type of bounce back candidate? Is he going to dip into the international market some? We haven't even seen him draft either yet. That is probably the most important thing to a rebuild. If you look at teams that had a fast/successful rebuild those teams drafted well and got big time players in the first round. If he doesn't draft well we could end up like the Pirates the last 10 years. They flopped twice on #1 picks...you just can't do that and you can't fail as much as they did in the Top 5 like they did.

#3-#5ish starters may lose out a bit, but all innings will still need to be covered and I'm guessing durable relievers who could pitch 2-3 innings 2-3 times per week could stand to make a pretty decent raise. And #1-#2 type starters may become even more valued. So would the rate of pay per nine innings decrease under the model discussed above? Maybe, maybe not, but I don't think it would deviate significantly from the rate of inflation salaries are currently on. I think a lot of people could lose a lot of money. If you debut in MLB under this type of format you are going to be shafted money wise. How much are you really going to pay a guy if he only pitches 4 innings or so? If you aren't a team using this pitching model you are probably going to be weary of paying big money. I think it would be a huge money problem if only a handful of teams were doing it. It is hard to say where money would be allocated in such a situation. If you have a pitcher like Kershaw is he exempt from this funky idea and you let him pitch as long as he wants? Or is Kershaw really only going to pitch 4-5 innings? You also have the roster issue. Is this something you could really do for 162 games of the year effectively? That is pretty questionable.Who knows if it would work or not. What are you going to do when it takes just 3 innings to go through the order twice? That would put a lot of stress on the other guys. What if your starter flops in an inning? Do you just let him get shelled for 4 innings before taking him out or do you burn up some of your other pitchers too to finish the game? Obviously there is something to this idea. We see something very similar every year in the postseason at the end of a series. Sometimes it works and other times you look stupid for taking out a guy doing well for a pitcher who is off.

You aren't going to satisfy their wallets that way. What pitching even cares about wins anyway? A pitcher only going 3-4 innings a start isn't going to be treated nicely on the open market. Big loss in money.

Any ideas on times? For some reason I can't find it on the Brewers website. http://brewers.mlblogs.com/2015/11/23/brewers-35th-annual-clubhouse-sale-scheduled-for-december-4-6/

That is so incredibly wrong I don't even know how to respond. Chris Sale is only worth one prospect that projects to MAYBE have ace potential? No that is incredibly stupid. So why would Khris Davis be worth a B-prospect because that is what he ended up being in the MLB? Good question, I know.

Jean Segura is not getting anything close to a Top 100 prospect. I would take Sardinas over him value wise to be honest and he got us some fringe prospect. Segura offers similar defense at SS but also provides some gap power which Sardinas will never possess. I am definitely not high on Segura but to say Sardinas is better is ridiculous. Luis Sardinas is younger, cheaper, and has some upside if you are a dreamer. Jean Segura is a utility player on any half decent team. He is horrid and going to make $3mil this year. I didn't say he was better, but value wise the only reason Segura has more is if you like looking at the All Star selection on his resume.