Greenleaf1

Fulmer is FAR more difficult to get than Verlander. Verlander is 34, performing very average, and owed $70M. Aging, overpaid and mediocre. Not a ton of value there. Fulmer: young, cheap, controllable and very good. That means it's going to take a lot. Far more than Verlander. He meant if we eat Verlander's contract would they be more likely to trade Fulmer, knowing they could get that money off the books. Tigers front office seems to want top prospects and complete salary relief in a Verlander trade though, so I guess they don't see him as the liability that you do.

Sounds like the Astros asked about Fulmer and were basically told the Tigers are waiting to trade him this offseason when all teams can bid on him. So Fulmer is probably a no unless we give up like 5 top 10 prospects for him.

A 5 year deal on any player could go south. Shaw has shown potential in previous years, this year he made adjustments, cut his strikeouts, and now he's playing insanely consistently all year so far at a top level, plus his defense has been pretty solid too. I'm willing to take the risk on Shaw. The thing about these extensions is that you pretty much have to take the risk with some of these guys early, before they are 100% proven assets (which nobody really is anyways), because that's how you can get the cheap deals that will either allow you to add necessary pieces later or allow you to trade them for big hauls if the team underperforms. If you look at the Brewers recent extension history: If we don't sign Lucroy early before his bat came around, we wouldn't have had nearly as good of an opportunity to trade him and certainly not for the big name prospects we received. Extending Braun was seen as very team friendly and smart at the time. It hasn't played out exactly like we'd want, but Braun is hardly a burden on our team right now with his contract. He also makes less money later in the deal rather than more, so Braun would have to really fall off a cliff performance-wise for that extension to haunt our rebuild. Gomez's extension was reasonable and ended up netting us a huge haul of prospects. Hart signed a 3 year extension and ended up being a huge part of the playoff team. Identifying your core players and signing them to team-friendly extensions is pretty much the name of the game these days. The risk is there, sure, but we have so much room to add money next year that I'd like to start seeing some of it used to lock up some of these players and start to actually build that core.

As much as I've been hating on Villar, he just had an 8g hitting streak with an OBP over .370 during that time. He's obviously holding his own recently, let's hope he continues to improve. Anyways, Sogard will be back in a few days so not much reason to fret anymore at this point.

Before yesterday, Villar was on an 8g hitting streak with a .378 OBP during that time. Probably best to leave him where he's at for a few more days until Sogard gets back.

Extensions for guys who haven't signed their first big contract yet typically only go a few years beyond free agency anyways. I'm fine locking up Shaw through age 33 or 34, plus those years would likely be club options anyways.

Sounds like they're playing hard to get with Happ based on reports so far, which suggests to me the Brewers should move on and focus on other targets. I'm really not interested in Happ if the price gets too high, and maybe if we back off a bit they might soften.

I've never seen Fulmer pitch but have heard nothing but amazing things about him over the past year and a half or so. Cubs inquired on him but were told it would require Happ/Baez plus more I'm sure, so they moved on to Quintana. I'd guess that any deal for Fulmer starts with Brinson/Hader with no room for negotiations. From there, you're probably adding another top 10 prospect like Diaz/Erceg/Dubon/Clark/Phillips, a 10-20 type (maybe Ponce or Peralta), and then probably a near-MLB ready reliever since I swear all of these big deals tend to include one of these (take your pick on Wang/Archer/Derby?). So let's say the deal is Brinson/Hader/Erceg/Peralta/Archer.....it's a steep price to pay, but I'm not entirely sure I'd rule it out, and I say that as someone who would call Brinson pretty much untouchable for most of the conventional guys out there (Quintana before he was dealt, Gray, etc.).

I'm going to go with Gray, Nelson, Guerra, Garza, Woodruff, with Anderson replacing Guerra once he's ready. Davies I'm guessing will be pitching in Oakland. Suter to the pen.

I like this trade for the Brewers for two reasons: 1. Maybe getting some bullpen help (for multiple seasons) won't cost the Brewers an arm and a leg if they're willing to take relievers with some money on their contracts. 2. Proves the A's are willing to make big trades without getting a big name in return. Could mean that we could load up a deal for Gray with mid-level prospects and then highlight the package with Corey Ray instead of giving up Brinson or one of the big 4 pitchers. I know Gray is a much bigger target than either of these guys, but this return for 2 good relief pitchers seems low to me. I know Thornburg/Smith are a bit cheaper and a bit more controllable and a bit better, but I'm not sure the difference between the two pairs is as big as the difference in prospects that we got vs. what the A's got (Shaw/Bickford/Dubon/Susac/Pennington/Coca). I'm sure there's going to be a lot of smart people on this thread about to tell me why my opinions listed in #2 are wrong, but I will say I was surprised by the return.

I would define core as guys you'd sign to an extension. Looks like the Brewers saw Villar as part of that potential core during the offseason (which I wouldn't have), but I do think this is a good definition because it shows a team's commitment to a player beyond the default control they already have. This offseason is going to be an interesting one for Stearns, because I think he's going to start having to make those decisions about a year earlier than he thought he might. There are now a lot of players who look like types you're going to want to sign cheaper extensions now, rather than wait another year and risk them deciding to just wait for free agency (or want a much pricier extension). Assuming players end this year with some matter of consistency from the performance they've had up to this point, I'd be potentially looking for extensions for (in order of most wanted to least): - Chase Anderson - Domingo Santana - Jimmy Nelson - Orlando Arcia - Travis Shaw I'd possibly add Corey Knebel to this list, but I'd have to look into whether these types of extensions are common for closers (or any relievers), and the success rate they've had in the past. Given the level of risk there, I'll leave him off the list for now. The reason I chose these 5 players is not just for their own performance, but for our ability to replace them with minor league talent in the future. SS/3B is not necessarily a position of strength in the minors, and Shaw/Arcia have both shown talent that looks legitimate this year (Arcia more on defense than his recent BABIP influenced run at the plate). Pitching is always a position of need, and I'd say the biggest and happiest surprise of this season has been the steps forward for Nelson/Anderson, and there's plenty of reasoning from both to expect these improvements are sustainable (Anderson especially, which is why I rated him higher). Santana I've just always been high on, his minor league numbers were killer, he has great plate discipline and tons of power, and he just seemed like the guy that when given an extended chance would really develop into a special hitter, and he's showing that this year at a still pretty young age. If anything, I don't see this as his ceiling, and see many 30+ homer seasons coming for him. I'd rather lock that up now than wait. I read an article recently that focused on Hahn's ability with the White Sox to lock up his young talent (2-ish years of experience) to contract extensions, and how that has been much more important than his negotiating skills at facilitating their current rebuild. Contract extensions for Sale/Quintana/Eaton took the potential returns for those players from high to astronomical. The hope was obviously that they'd play out those cheap extensions on winning White Sox teams, but it's a nice backup to have cost-controlled players available to trade on a struggling team, especially now that teams aren't wanting to give up top prospects for rentals nearly as much. So anyways that post got a little long but I feel like core = players you'd sign to an extension is a good definition, and should be an interesting offseason for Stearns to say the least.

It's tough when you have like 10 days between appearances like Scahill did there, but I think if he comes out next time and can't get outs, we'll be seeing Blazek back up pretty quickly. As for babying Hader, he's been solid out of the bullpen but Hughes is the definite 7th inning guy for now and he has earned that spot. I think Hader in the bullpen makes perfect sense: - Let him continue to develop in a lower pressure environment than the rotation - Let him work on his stuff out of the thin air of CS, where he was obviously not comfortable (and sending him down to AA was not an option) - Let the Brewers utilize his talent down the stretch where a still shaky but undeniably talented pitcher would have his most value: the bullpen So Hader helps out, gets eased into the bigs, gets out of CS, and then will be ready to start the year in the rotation next year if needed. Seems like a great plan to me, and so far it's working out well for Hader and the Brewers.

I probably can't find the tweet but it was from one of the regular Brewers minor league tweeters that mentioned the velo uptick was something he was hearing in the last few weeks, and seemed like it might've been due to an adjustment he had made at AA. I might be wrong though, there's been a lot of talk about him making adjustments throughout the season. Honestly though, if he's making adjustments and seeing any sort of increase in consistency/velocity, then with these results his realistic ceiling is only going up.

The Marlins interest me. With the ownership craziness going on right now, it kinda seems like they're in a position to misplay this deadline and potentially give away some good players for way less than they're worth. I don't really have any evidence to support this theory (so take the word "theory" very lightly), but the way they seem to be of two minds about trading away top players makes me interested to see how they handle this deadline. It's possible that the result is that they miss the opportunity to get value for players entirely by not trading them at all, but I do feel like the Brewers could get a steal out of their bullpen potentially. That said, if I had to choose right now between the trade we just made for Webb and giving up anything of value for either of these two guys, I'd stick with the Webb trade. Gives us a lot more flexibility, potential for a strong lefty out of the bullpen for years to come, and didn't have to give up much. Leave it to Stearns to think out of the box.

With that, I have the espn Insider have access to Keith Laws prospect updates. Brewers ranked in the top 50 for April and July as well as the top 100 he created in January January 2017 ranking(top 100) - April Rankings update(Top 50) - July ranking update(Top 50) Ray 34 - 27 - NR Brinson 38 - 31 - 30 Diaz 41 - 30 - NR Burnes - NR - NR - 38 Clark - 67 - NR - NR Erceg - 70 - NR - NR Hader - 71 - NR - NR Ortiz - 79 - NR - NR Woodruff - 100 - NR - NR It will be interesting when MILB updates there top 100 but from the update ranking between BP, Law, and BA. It seems a lot of scouts are down on Ray. Keith Law was the biggest fan out of those three scout sites before and after the draft. Having Law drop Ray out of the top 50 says alot. For people who don't have access, Burness is right behind Mckay (first rounder from Louisville by Atlanta) and right ahead of Gohara (ATL) and Triston Mckenzie (stud pitcher for the Indians). Seeing him ahead of Mckenzie puts a smile on my face because I know a lot of scouts love Mckenzie and myself view Mckenzie as a future TOR pitcher (Carolina has faced him twice these year and he dominated them both times). I don't know if that is Law and his "love" for the Brewers or reality but that is one sad state of affairs. Only Brinson and Burnes are up there. Maybe Hader is off because he is in the majors? Clark, Ray, and Diaz have all been major disappointments. Yes there are excuses I suppose but Tim Tebow is at 972 in high A and he hasn't picked up a bat since HS and had another job in between if I recall. Massive small sample size alert on Tebow. As for the top 50, players currently in the majors were not eligible (honestly something I wish all prospect lists would do), so Hader/Woodruff were not eligible. He mentioned in his chat yesterday that Ray was nowhere near his top 50, seemingly suggesting he wouldn't be on his top 100 either. He did say he figured there'd be about half a dozen Brewers on his next top 100, which I would assume also would not include Hader/Woodruff, so take that for what it's worth. I submitted a question about Burnes, but he didn't answer it. I believe he took 2 or 3 questions about how crappy Ray has been, and a couple other Brewers-related questions, so I was kinda peeved he wouldn't take any questions about a very surprising add to his top 50, but oh well. He said he talks to a lot of scouts for the list, so maybe he's hearing the same thing that someone had mentioned recently on Twitter that Burnes' velocity has seen an uptick recently and is more regularly hitting 96-97. Should be interesting to see how his pitches are graded when MLB.com updates its info.

This is a strange combination of three of my least favorite things: Tim Tebow, Stephen A Smith, and Breitbart.

Phillips is up as the short-term replacement guy, same reason as the last time he was brought up. If they intended to give him a lot of playing time, it would most likely be Brinson coming up, in my opinion. Still nice to see Phillips up for a few days though. Real bummer for Blazek, who was pitching well since coming up. Definite victim of having an option remaining though, as opposed to Scahill/Torres, who are likely going to be on short leashes now that Blazek is available on the 40-man to replace them.

I agree that I think this probably doesn't hurt our chances that much. If anything, it makes the Yankees less likely to make a big trade.

Cooper has discussed how he has changed his approach at the plate this year to elevate the ball more, resulting in more home runs. CS is also not the launching pad that people think it is. It's more of an AVG booster with more singles/doubles instead of outs/singles than it is a turn doubles into homers park. There are plenty of parks in the PCL that ARE launching pads, but Cooper's homers last I checked were pretty split between home and road, so there's reason to believe that his power boost this year is real and not just a PCL mirage. There's reason to expect his numbers to go down in the majors for any number of reasons (major jump in difficulty, not in PCL anymore are among them), but I wouldn't completely rule out his video game-like numbers just because he played in Colorado Springs. It's not like EVERY player that plays there is all of a sudden bad just because they hit well in the PCL. All that said, I still like this trade. Not every guy in our system is going to make it onto a 25-man team, and Cooper's chances were pretty slim to stick on the big league roster. He's in the AL now, so if he does vastly outproduce Thames/Aguilar (which seems unlikely, he'd have to hit his CS numbers in order to greatly outproduce them this year), at least it won't be against us, but we definitely need a controllable lefty in the bullpen with a high strikeout rate more than we need a 3rd first baseman to back up two that are pretty good already.

If it's Cooper, I love this trade. He was blocked and just realistically had no chance of breaking through with us over the next few years. He also would need to be added to the 40-man this offseason, which his numbers at this point would essentially force us to do that. This is the kinda trade I think a lot of us were hoping we would make. Deal from our minor league depth, guys who we just might not have room for on our 40-man, and get some other pieces that are either not required to put on the 40-man right away or, in this case, are at a position of need for us and are cheap/controllable. Yankees could make out like bandits on this one if Cooper is anywhere near his AAA numbers, but honestly even if he does, I wouldn't feel too bad having Thames/Aguilar instead. And as I'm writing this, it's official. Cooper to the Yanks.

Could it be Aguilar? Maybe but I guess the idea of sending one older AAA guy with good results for another makes more sense to me. It's a chance for both sides to essentially buy low and hope for the best. If it works out for either team, they have a good controllable piece for years. Aguilar is already a little more proven this year than Webb, and I feel like the Brewers would value him a little higher than this.

Fastball at 91, which is surprising given his K numbers. I'm guessing we're sending Cooper back. Yankees need a 1B.

I know there's like nobody in the entire city that thinks this way, but if hypothetically you were a fan of both the Cubs AND the White Sox, then I think you'd be a huge fan of this trade.

I like this trade for the Brewers, but not really because of how it affects us this year. For this year, the only difference is that the Cubs now have one more incredibly tough pitcher that we have to face, which is obviously bad for us. However, by gutting the top end of their farm system, this puts the Cubs into a pretty limited competitive window, rather than Stearns' approach of trying to make sure we consistently have talent coming up from the minors. Hopefully this will coincide with the Brewers rebuild just hitting its stride, and we'll have an opening to dominate the NL Central for years while the Cubs go through another rebuild.

He's in KLaw's top 50, for whatever that's worth.....