Lathund

It's even been updated today to have the Brewers winning 88 and the Cardinals 86. I think the old version didn't include Wade Miley for instance. Might've been updates to the projections themselves too. Clay Davenports projections have the Brewers winning 90 and the Cardinals 87 too, and THE BAT X has the Brewers by 85-84, so it's not just PECOTA. Whereas obviously ZiPS goes the other way, by a lot. I'd still say the Cardinals are the favorites for the division, but the point is that it's close. They relied so heavily on Arenado and Goldschmidt staying completely healthy and having years waaay beyond their career averages, which is unlikely to happen again given that things like the Statcast metrics didn't even come close to backing up their improved results. They also had Pujols. Contreras is indeed an improvement offensively, but he's also a butcher behind the plate both in terms of framing (Which has a huge impact) and seemingly also in terms of calling pitchers/working with pitchers. His best overall season is 3.3 fWAR, second best 2.6. He's a good player, but defense matters at the position. Which brings us to the pitching staff... which wasn't strengthened at all. They have a very old and injury prone rotation. And they lack any kind of depth behind that. They have like two good relievers (One of whom was very very good, but has a really short track record of it). Their K/9 was the lowest in the majors last year, K% was 28th. Yes they have a good defense. But the best teams get 2.5 strikeouts / 9 innings more than the Cardinals, defense alone won't make up for that. And going to Willson Contreras won't improve their K/BB numbers any either. A new pitching coach as well to go with the new primary catcher and the retirement of Yadier Molina, even if he did not play a lot in his last year. I don't want to get too down on the Cardinals, they still have a strong team and as I said I still consider them favorites. But they had to have a lot of things go right to finish as far ahead as they did, and I don't see that happening again.

Good return for a fringe reliever. I really liked Topa when he first came up, but has struggled with injuries a lot since. Could still turn out to be a good reliever if he stays healthy, Brewers needed a 40-man spot for Miley, and I feel like this is a productive way to do it.

IMO no. But I tend to be much more in the "Defense first" camp than most people are when it comes to catchers, Catcher offense is really expensive, and a catcher strong both offensively and defensively even more so (Hence the, justified, sky high ask for Murphy). I'd then rather just platoon two defensively strong catchers and spend elsewhere. And wait for Quero. Although with that being said, I don't hate the idea of Vazquez for 2-3 years. Unless the current market has inflated the price beyond all reason, that is.

That statcast page is more of an argument *against* signing Drury than for. That's a league average xwOBA, and one of the larger differentials between wOBA and xwOBA in the league. Naturally the Statcast xstats aren't gospel, but it's not as if he has strong underlying metrics. And if a knock on the Brewers in 2022 was a "HR or nothing" approach with not enough focus on getting on base, then Drury really doesn't help with that. That being said, for a lefty masher to platoon with Tellez and (indirectly) with Turang it wouldn't be terrible at the right price, I just don't think it's that much of an upgrade. It really comes down to how much of his 2022 you think is repeatable. I don't think it really is, so I'm skeptical.

Swanson just seems like a Cardinal already. No real standout skill or statistical outlier, just allround solid getting value from defense, baserunning and an average-ish bat. Probably a 3-3.5 WAR type of guy most years with the occasional all-star year. Good player, but wouldn't mind the Cardinals spending a ton of money on him. But because he already seems like a Cardinal, it seems like an odd place for them to spend, as they produce that kind of player (or close enough anyway) frequently, most recently Tommy Edman. I don't actually think they'll end up with any of the big shortstops in the end though. They seem to trade for and extend players, not sign big FAs. So these big 8-10 year deals don't seem as likely. Also pretty much their entire rotation are free agents after this year, they'll probably need to have a good chunk of money set aside for that.

As much as Yadi declined in his last couple of years, he was still great at handling pitchers by all accounts. Probably a big part of why their underwhelming pitching kept managing to be servicable year on year. If they turn to Contreras they'll be in for a rude awakening I think. No Yadi, and a new pitching coach, quite a lot of uncertainty for an already highly volatile (Injuries, depth) pitching staff.

The very fact that he signed on a major league deal means there was significant interest (EDIT: And noone but you has said there was necessarily significant interest in a major league contract specifically. Just enough interest to warrant a major league deal), or they wouldn't have offered a major league deal, That's always been the case in the past when minor league FAs without MLB experience sign these deals. I have no idea what his chances are, since before today I had not heard of him and all I have to go on is basically his bbref/Fangraphs pages and the info in this thread. But apparently you, from looking at the very most surface levels of stats, can with confidence declare that front offices are lead by idiots and that he will never amount to anything. There is more to scouting than just looking at a triple slash line you know. He increased his power output by a lot this year, you automatically suggest it's a fluke, but teams will have both much better data, as well as having watched him so they'll have a much better idea if it looks like it's real or a fluke. Might also be worth mentioning that Perkins' 117 wRC+ is better than what Tyrone Taylor ever produced in AAA, at the same age. Just to take the first example that came to mind of someone with mediocre minor league numbers in his mid 20s who turned into a solid MLB player. Again, I don't know the first thing about the guy or how good he can be. I'm just saying that you have absolutely no basis for making definitive statements that he'll never be a major leaguer barring a miracle.

I'm not particularly worried about losing Cam Devanney in the rule 5 draft tbh. In recent years, there's usually like 3-4 position players taken in each draft. Maybe there'll be a few more after the unique nature of 2020, no rule 5 draft in 2021, and the 26 man rosters, but it's still primarily limited by the roster spots. In a vacuum I could see how it could make sense to take a chance on him. But there are also 29 other teams, so not only does another team need to think it's a good idea, they also need to be able to even carry a rule 5 position player in the first place; which usually means non-contending teams. And then that spot needs to be a SS/3B. And perhaps most crucially, there needs to be no better rule 5 candidates available. With no draft last year and obviously no added 40-man spots, there are also more unprotected players than usual. Devanney might be a decent candidate, but I'd wager there's enough better ones out there to keep him safe. Bit surprised to see Singleton protected. I suppose they have to have a decent inkling that someone might select him. I also think that having seen him close up for a full season, they have a pretty good grasp on him, and if there's anything chance of further development. The batting average is ugly, but there's a .375 OBP and 24 HRs to go along with it this past year. And as a slow, pull-heavy LHH there's probably a few hits to be gained by the loss of the shift. So keep him around as Rowdy insurance for now. Not really a whole lot to lose, not like it's a big financial commitment or anything.

I'm not particularly worried about losing Cam Devanney in the rule 5 draft tbh. In recent years, there's usually like 3-4 position players taken in each draft. Maybe there'll be a few more after the unique nature of 2020, no rule 5 draft in 2021, and the 26 man rosters, but it's still primarily limited by the roster spots. In a vacuum I could see how it could make sense to take a chance on him. But there are also 29 other teams, so not only does another team need to think it's a good idea, they also need to be able to even carry a rule 5 position player in the first place; which usually means non-contending teams. And then that spot needs to be a SS/3B. And perhaps most crucially, there needs to be no better rule 5 candidates available. With no draft last year and obviously no added 40-man spots, there are also more unprotected players than usual. Devanney might be a decent candidate, but I'd wager there's enough better ones out there to keep him safe. Bit surprised to see Singleton protected. I suppose they have to have a decent inkling that someone might select him. I also think that having seen him close up for a full season, they have a pretty good grasp on him, and if there's anything chance of further development. The batting average is ugly, but there's a .375 OBP and 24 HRs to go along with it this past year. And as a slow, pull-heavy LHH there's probably a few hits to be gained by the loss of the shift. So keep him around as Rowdy insurance for now. Not really a whole lot to lose, not like it's a big financial commitment or anything.

You (and I for that matter) would think there are teams that would, but they almost never do. Very few position players get picked in the rule 5 draft; 3 in 2020 and 2019, 4 in 2018, 3½ (1 2-way player) in 2017. It's a big deal for teams, even rebuilding ones, to roster a player without the, uh, option to option them, that they absolutely do not want playing. I know on here every year we tend to overestimate how many players will be protected, and yet none of the ones left unprotected in recent years have been taken. He might very well be the highest rated prospect left unprotected in a while (If he does go unprotected), I just happen to think he's really not the type of prospect who gets picked in the Rule 5 draft. He's not a pitcher, he's not an elite defender, his bat right now isn't good enough to play. You could perhaps live with that if the player had a high enough upside, but Valerio doesn't have the power or the defense/position to be a star, even if he could very well be a good player. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility that someone picks him, but not a high enough risk to be worth spending 1-2 years on the 40-man without contributing IMO.

Rule 5 decisions aren't really about talent and potential only. Despite his struggles this year, there is still a lot of promise for Valerio, but is he someone you'd want to keep on your active roster for a whole season at this point? 76 wRC+ in AA, and while he has played multiple positions I get the impression that it's not because he's a great defender, but about finding him at bats. So he's not your defensive swiss army knife like Hernán Perez either. If it was a waivers situation where a team could pick him up and option him, I'm sure someone would. But for the active roster? I seriously doubt he's getting picked if unprotected. If a team really was willing to carry a position player who they expected to contribute very little in 2023, I imagine there would be players out there with higher upside to go for.

Rule 5 decisions aren't really about talent and potential only. Despite his struggles this year, there is still a lot of promise for Valerio, but is he someone you'd want to keep on your active roster for a whole season at this point? 76 wRC+ in AA, and while he has played multiple positions I get the impression that it's not because he's a great defender, but about finding him at bats. So he's not your defensive swiss army knife like Hernán Perez either. If it was a waivers situation where a team could pick him up and option him, I'm sure someone would. But for the active roster? I seriously doubt he's getting picked if unprotected. If a team really was willing to carry a position player who they expected to contribute very little in 2023, I imagine there would be players out there with higher upside to go for.

CF is the odd situation where I actually would prefer a (cheap) rental this deadline over a more expensive long-term acquisition, seeing as we have a trio of top prospects in AA who certainly look like the part now (Wiemer will likely end up in a corner, but he can play CF for now at least), as well as Chourio a bit further away. But admittedly there isn't a whole lot out there, so if Laureano is cheaper than I expect.. sure. As always though, I expect Brewers have checked in on every even remotely available player, just in case someone is available for a price they find attractive. Benintendi, Michael A Taylor, Laureano, and whoever else might be available in CF. Doesn't have to mean talks got anywhere.

CF is the odd situation where I actually would prefer a (cheap) rental this deadline over a more expensive long-term acquisition, seeing as we have a trio of top prospects in AA who certainly look like the part now (Wiemer will likely end up in a corner, but he can play CF for now at least), as well as Chourio a bit further away. But admittedly there isn't a whole lot out there, so if Laureano is cheaper than I expect.. sure. As always though, I expect Brewers have checked in on every even remotely available player, just in case someone is available for a price they find attractive. Benintendi, Michael A Taylor, Laureano, and whoever else might be available in CF. Doesn't have to mean talks got anywhere.

And the thing about a multi-positional excellent defender is that it's very easy to fit them onto the roster to give them the time and regular at bats to properly give them the chance to tap into their potential.

And the thing about a multi-positional excellent defender is that it's very easy to fit them onto the roster to give them the time and regular at bats to properly give them the chance to tap into their potential.

That player is significantly more valuable than 2 months of Josh Bell though. I mean even if the power never shows up at all and he's Alcides Escobar instead, I'd still take that every day with that defense. Or at the very least use him as part of a trade for something more long-term. What people tend to overlook with prospects is the impact of uncertainty. I mean I agree that Turang is extremely unlikely to top 4 WAR at his best even if we take the more optimistic end of the projections. But I also think he's highly likely to at least be Escobar or better. With Peterson a free agent and Wong with a team option that looks like it might get declined, even a SS/2B/CF utility man for minimum salary and with 3 option years remaining is useful. And I think he's almost certainly better than that. Anyway, I wouldn't necessarily lose much sleep over it either, it's more that I find it to be a short-sighted and unnecessary move. We're looking to compete over the next couple of years while we still have Burnes/Woodruff/Adames etc. So why trade away players who can contribute to that team (Even if it's peripherally) when you could trade players who, even if they pan out, will only do so in 2025 or beyond? I'd instead look to A-ball and below for the prospects we should trade this deadline.

That player is significantly more valuable than 2 months of Josh Bell though. I mean even if the power never shows up at all and he's Alcides Escobar instead, I'd still take that every day with that defense. Or at the very least use him as part of a trade for something more long-term. What people tend to overlook with prospects is the impact of uncertainty. I mean I agree that Turang is extremely unlikely to top 4 WAR at his best even if we take the more optimistic end of the projections. But I also think he's highly likely to at least be Escobar or better. With Peterson a free agent and Wong with a team option that looks like it might get declined, even a SS/2B/CF utility man for minimum salary and with 3 option years remaining is useful. And I think he's almost certainly better than that. Anyway, I wouldn't necessarily lose much sleep over it either, it's more that I find it to be a short-sighted and unnecessary move. We're looking to compete over the next couple of years while we still have Burnes/Woodruff/Adames etc. So why trade away players who can contribute to that team (Even if it's peripherally) when you could trade players who, even if they pan out, will only do so in 2025 or beyond? I'd instead look to A-ball and below for the prospects we should trade this deadline.

Yeah I would absolutely not do that for a rental like this. With the many arbitration eligible players on the roster, there will be very little payroll room unless Mark A is willing to allow a higher budget (Which he most likely will not). The prospects who are close to MLB ready will play a big part in allowing the Brewers to handle that. To be able to keep the big contributors around, they'd have to cut around the edges instead, and having prospects ready to step in is key to that even if the prospects aren't stars. So if it takes a better prospect to make the trade, I'd prefer it to be someone further away from the majors, even if their upside is greater. So say one of those toolsy prospects with upside to dream on, but questionable hit tools. Sometimes they find their way and become great players, but more often they're Lewis Brinson and Monte Harrison. And either way, they'll be in MLB only after Burnes, Woodruff etc. are all free agents anyway. So someone like Hedbert Perez could be a headliner. Now I'm a prospect hugger and not a huge Bell fan so I wouldn't like it overly much either, but it's the type of return that won't impact the Brewers for years, if it ever does.

Yeah I would absolutely not do that for a rental like this. With the many arbitration eligible players on the roster, there will be very little payroll room unless Mark A is willing to allow a higher budget (Which he most likely will not). The prospects who are close to MLB ready will play a big part in allowing the Brewers to handle that. To be able to keep the big contributors around, they'd have to cut around the edges instead, and having prospects ready to step in is key to that even if the prospects aren't stars. So if it takes a better prospect to make the trade, I'd prefer it to be someone further away from the majors, even if their upside is greater. So say one of those toolsy prospects with upside to dream on, but questionable hit tools. Sometimes they find their way and become great players, but more often they're Lewis Brinson and Monte Harrison. And either way, they'll be in MLB only after Burnes, Woodruff etc. are all free agents anyway. So someone like Hedbert Perez could be a headliner. Now I'm a prospect hugger and not a huge Bell fan so I wouldn't like it overly much either, but it's the type of return that won't impact the Brewers for years, if it ever does.

An extension is absolutely possible, it just won't be at a discount. Give him the biggest deal ever, make him the first $500m player, and you can extend him. If it's a team like the Dodgers, who have shown they can be competitive year in year out and have the resources to keep that up, I'm sure he'll be more willing too. Regardless of where on the "Possible" to "Likely" scale it is, the prospect of having 2½ years of exclusive negotiating rights with Soto *will* factor into the cost of acquiring him. So a team that would be looking to get just the 2½ years would still have to pay the extra cost of the possibility of the extension in order to be the highest bidder.

An extension is absolutely possible, it just won't be at a discount. Give him the biggest deal ever, make him the first $500m player, and you can extend him. If it's a team like the Dodgers, who have shown they can be competitive year in year out and have the resources to keep that up, I'm sure he'll be more willing too. Regardless of where on the "Possible" to "Likely" scale it is, the prospect of having 2½ years of exclusive negotiating rights with Soto *will* factor into the cost of acquiring him. So a team that would be looking to get just the 2½ years would still have to pay the extra cost of the possibility of the extension in order to be the highest bidder.

As good as he has been this year, he is still a career 118 wRC+ hitter overall (114 wRC+ prior to this year). And when trying to predict what he'll do the rest of the year, I'll always put more weight on the 2800 PA sample than the 400 PA one. Not that pre-2022 Bell wouldn't also improve the offense, but it then becomes far more of a marginal improvement which ought to be reflected in the acquisition cost. In other words, a rental like him is someone I feel is a perfectly cromulent deadline addition, but not someone I'd give up a whole lot for. I certainly wouldn't give up any prospect who is likely to impact the major league ballclub in the next couple of years, nor any of the true top prospects who are further away either. So no to Frelick, Mitchell, Turang, Small, Chourio, Wiemer, Black, Quero, Feliciano and the likes. And I'd try to hold on to any of the better pitching prospects as the system seems position-player heavy. I'd probably look to trade from the toolsy but raw outfielders behind those mentioned. Guys like Gray Jr might not hold a ton of value on their own, but package a few of them together and it might be attractive especially to a team like the Nationals who are very much scouting/tools focused, and not as much about skills/data. Actually that last points was something I hadn't considered; Nats could be a good fit for a trade in the sense that the two teams are probably polar opposites (Based on the writing I've seen about the profile of different front offices anyway. Which seems solid, but who knows for sure...) in what types of prospects they value. Makes it more likely that a trade can be had that both teams will feel like they did well to get.

As good as he has been this year, he is still a career 118 wRC+ hitter overall (114 wRC+ prior to this year). And when trying to predict what he'll do the rest of the year, I'll always put more weight on the 2800 PA sample than the 400 PA one. Not that pre-2022 Bell wouldn't also improve the offense, but it then becomes far more of a marginal improvement which ought to be reflected in the acquisition cost. In other words, a rental like him is someone I feel is a perfectly cromulent deadline addition, but not someone I'd give up a whole lot for. I certainly wouldn't give up any prospect who is likely to impact the major league ballclub in the next couple of years, nor any of the true top prospects who are further away either. So no to Frelick, Mitchell, Turang, Small, Chourio, Wiemer, Black, Quero, Feliciano and the likes. And I'd try to hold on to any of the better pitching prospects as the system seems position-player heavy. I'd probably look to trade from the toolsy but raw outfielders behind those mentioned. Guys like Gray Jr might not hold a ton of value on their own, but package a few of them together and it might be attractive especially to a team like the Nationals who are very much scouting/tools focused, and not as much about skills/data. Actually that last points was something I hadn't considered; Nats could be a good fit for a trade in the sense that the two teams are probably polar opposites (Based on the writing I've seen about the profile of different front offices anyway. Which seems solid, but who knows for sure...) in what types of prospects they value. Makes it more likely that a trade can be had that both teams will feel like they did well to get.

I think as long as they feel like Benintendi is passable enough in CF to play there maybe twice a week or so (Perhaps when the least fly-ball prone pitchers are on the mound) it'll be a good roster fit. Other days it'll be Yelich, Benintendi and Cutch rotating the LF/DH spots. Occasionally Renfroe too I suppose, but I like his defense in RF.