Humans Need Water

If he's saying 2b/3b I'll go with Lowrie on 1/10M deal. Switch hitter but power coming as lefty hitter starting at 2b but when we face lefties he can shift to 3b spelling Shaw if needed with Perez going to 2b (hits lefties well). When he's on the bench being a switch hitter is a great thing to have.

People think this signing means Thames has to be dealt. I just think it should be pointed out that a Thames trade is NOT inevitable because of signing Grandal. Besides, that lineup has only ONE potential black hole: Arcia. I've said Thames is likely to be traded *long before* Grandal was signed. We're going to have 13 pitchers so that leaves 4 bench spots. Pina, Gamel, Perez, Spangenberg (both lefties here have some pop too and they're both leaving Safeco/Petco for Miller Park not to mention we just got a huge power boost to the lineup with Grandal). Thames plays 1b/corner OF and we don't need a 1b/corner OF (Yelich, Braun, Gamel, Perez for OF and Aguilar, Shaw, Braun, Perez, Spangenberg for 1b - technically Grandal too but he's catching). Thames also makes like 5M+ more than Aguilar and has 2yrs less control (if you included Thames option). You don't have to sell me on how productive Thames is. I know he is. I like him. He gets on base and hits for power. But he doesn't make sense for this team right now. So his 6M coming off the books would help go toward a player who does make sense for this current team (ie Bum, potentially a vet 2b on a 1yr, potentially Moose on a 1yr, etc)

The natural inclination is to think that Kratz is the odd man out, but we've seen how much they like him. Pina has some potential trade value. If they really believe in Nottingham, I could see Pina getting dealt before the season, Kratz staying as backup and Nottingham as insurance in AAA. Grandal is going to get the lion's share of starts no matter who is the backup. Frankly, this is why I wonder if they'll turn around and trade Pina. Backup catchers rarely PH anyways. I feel like Pina is wasted in the backup role, would be better to trade him now. Especially considering he will be 32 this year and is entering arbitration. If we were ever going to get value for him in a trade, now would be the time. That's logical but I think the issue becomes the significant drop off from Pina to Kratz as the backup and what happens if Grandal gets injured and misses a decent amount of time? You're now turning to a starter in Pina vs a backup in Kratz. Given it's the catching position and it's difficult to find quality catchers I don't think we should trade Pina at all, even if both Grandal/Kratz are gone and Nottingham takes over the following year. Let him stay here and give us depth and stability at that position until he's a FA in 3yrs. Plus, there's nobody coming up behind Nottingham in the system that's remotely close to being ready within 3yrs. Pina will be an excellent backup and if the Brewers believe in Nottingham all the more reason to keep Pina as it'll be difficult to find a backup of his quality at that price. Kratz got starting time in the playoffs and was great vs CO and pure trash (2-16, bb) vs LA. Pina was consistent in the 3 games he started (1 CO, 2 LA) and was great. Now imagine Pina doing that same thing as the backup but with Grandal replacing Kratz...even though Grandal's been trash in the playoffs over his career he's still a much better option than Kratz was for us in 2018.

I have the Brewers payroll around $104M if you assume they trade Anderson and Thames and you don't count any incentives, buyouts and deferred payments from prior years (Garza). So that seems to me there is room for more pitcher or 2B salary. I would say they potentially wait and see more specifically where to spend the rest of their money at the trading deadline, but with Grandal on a one year deal, I assume there is going to be more move(s) coming before the season starts. The MLBTR article on this signing said we're at 123M after Grandal so that's the number I went off of. That includes Chase, Thames and everyone else owed money this year. Thames is guaranteed to be traded so that's 6M cleared off so down to 117M. They can go much higher no doubt for the right piece(s). I personally don't think Chase is going anywhere. If they add a rotation arm it's that person, Nelson, Chacin, Chase, Davies and if for some reason Nelson has issues we have Burnes in house with plenty of dudes to backfill his slot (T. Williams, Barnes, etc)

I can't find anything on Kratz's contract saying it's a split contract. I don't think it is. He is also out of options, not sure if he's ever been outrighted. I don't think it's a split contract. I think it was just 1yr for 1.2M if he makes the team but if he's cut before the season they pay him 300K. I'm assuming nobody else will sign him so he ends up in AAA mentoring Nottingham while being a depth piece in case Grandal/Pina are injured. Nottingham can fully develop then. I can't see Pina on the move as a result of this signing - no way they want Kratz over him as the backup as that's a sizable downgrade. And after 2019 Grandal and Kratz are FA so if Pina is gone now that would leave just Nottingham heading into 2020. Plus, Grandal wasn't acquired because we needed an upgrade over Pina, who's been like a 95 OPS+ hitter and great defender. That's not the issue. The issue is the lack of offense of the Kratz/Bandy types or the solid offense from Vogt but brutal arm so guys steal bases walking. Pina covers both sides well and landing Grandal turned out to be the best thing as he upgrades an already productive player now making him one of the best backups in the game so we're deep at that spot now (including Kratz/Nottingham AAA).

Trade Thames in a Lind type deal then get Bum. That only adds 6M to the 123M payroll we're sitting at right now and locks up the rotation with not only a vet with serious success but he's also a lefty. Even if he posts his 2017 numbers he's still one of the leaders of this rotation and it's a big boost (Nelson healthy also feels like a free rotation upgrade as well). This team is essentially set then outside of maybe some flyers here and there coming to spring. Plus 30-31M comes off the books after this season between Bum/Grandal too. I think this is the play that happens - nothing at 2b as Spangenberg/Perez platoon until Hiura then they both fall to versatile bench roles. Take the 2018 roster and add Bum/Nelson to the rotation, Grandal at catcher and eventually Hiura at 2b with a better overall bench + full year of Burnes/Woodruff/Peralta. YIKES

This signing puts the payroll around 123M. There's no way we would be paying him 13M annually for 4yrs so being able to land him for 1yr is a huge boost to this team. Switch hitter with most ABs coming from the left side, where all his power is, will serve well in Miller Park and something Stearns seems to look for. Pineapple now becomes one of the best backups in MLB and the C spot gives us 2 starters now becoming a strength.

Please note that I valued Woodruff the equivalent of a #80 prospect (on the top 100), Peralta as the equivalent of a #100 prospect and Ray the equivalent of a #110 prospect. If I had 20 different prospect lists and took the average of where each of these players fell on the list, those would be my "best guess" numbers. So actually I had Woodruff and Peralta higher in terms of rank. Ray gets the higher dollar value because when the experts start looking at old prospect lists and then calculate WAR for the players first six years based on the historical data, hitters tend to do better than pitchers so hitters get the slightly higher value numbers. See the following, which is the basis for most of the numbers I come up with. I believe the first time I saw this was when reillymcshane posted the 2016 version at brewerfan.net http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/mlb-prospect-surplus-values-2018-updated-edition/ But if you're factoring in Ray's present day value then you can't use rankings for Woodruff and Peralta as neither are prospects anymore. They've both proven they can perform at the MLB level and in high stress situations - they're now MLB arms. Regardless, all of them have more surplus value than Bum's 15M area so technically none of them should be on the table as it's an overpay. Although I can easily see someone of Ray's caliber going for Bum but could just as easily see something like a Erceg + Houser.

Here's where you're struggling. You believe Bum is still an elite pitcher. He's not *and* he has 1yr of control coming off his worst season and 2yrs straight of decline with a velo drop. Dude, Burnes/Woodruff/Peralta blow away Lopez/Jungmann in both terms of being starters and pen arms. It's apples and oranges. Burnes/Woodruff pound the zone whereas Lopez/Jungmann don't because they lack control. Lopez also doesn't have a 3rd pitch of any sorts and Jungmann was getting tagged in AA at almost age level. His rookie season was a fluke based on stuff and performance around that season (before and after). Jungmann also was sitting low-90s if I recall correctly and didn't have much of a 3rd pitch either. When Burnes/Woodruff start they're using 3 pitches. Peralta mixes in his change but needs to improve his control overall then he'll have the 3 pitch mix instead of being so fastball dominant right now. All 3 of them have significantly outperformed Lopez/Jungmann every step of the way. You don't have to be in the rotation to be an impact MLB player. Even in the pen all 3 would dominate.

Anyone saying they'd be willing to trade Woodruff or Peralta for Bum is saying they think 2019 Bum has equal or more value to 2019-2024 Woodruff/Peralta. And the only way that's remotely close to being true is if Woodruff/Peralta suffers a career ending injury in 2019. Even in straight pen roles Woodruff/Peralta have significantly more value than Bum given their control. More importantly is how Stearns is building the current team, which might not apply a few years down the road but works super well right now. Guys like Guerra, Burnes, Woodruff in the pen offering extreme versatility (ie everything from starting to entering in the 3rd-4th innings for a struggling starter giving 3 innings of work to 1-2 batter high leverage situations) are very valuable to this teams makeup and success. If they're targeting Bum, which I believe they are, they're most likely looking at Bum, Nelson, Chacin, Chase, Davies with Guerra, Burnes, Woodruff in those versatility roles. Peralta I think starts in AAA but will easily contribute plenty this year either as a starter again or in that versatile pen role. I get the question mark surrounding Nelson but the team is also saying he'll be 100% full go by ST - and ST won't be the first time he's picking up a ball standing on the mound. He's already been doing that to prep for ST. And with Brown starting in AAA it allows us to trade a rotation arm during the season, bump one of Burnes/Woodruff/Peralta to the rotation with Brown back-filling that versatility pen spot. Hader, Knebel, Jeffress, Claudio guaranteed to round out the pen. Chase was great in 2017 and had a couple bad stretches last year otherwise was pretty darn solid. Davies was very good in 2016/2017 and injured most of last year. Those two pitchers as your #4-5 in the rotation (hypothetically speaking if we landed Bum), especially given their salaries, would be great, which is why I don't think either should be part of a deal with SF. And people need to stop taking untouchable out of context. Someone (myself included) saying on this thread they absolutely wouldn't trade Burnes, Woodruff or Peralta for Bum isn't saying those 3 are untouchable. We're saying we're not trading that talent and value over the 2019-2024 seasons solely for 2019 Bum. It's that simple. If Bum had 2-3yrs control right now it's a different story but he doesn't - he has 1yr combined with him declining in performance the past 2yrs with a velocity drop as well. Also, Bum didn't pitch injured last year like Davies did at certain points where it clearly affected his performance. Bum missed the first 2 months then started every game the rest of the year. Giving up Ray for Bum is very well what might need to happen and as much as I don't want to do that I probably still would. I think he puts up something similar to his 2017 numbers and he needs to given he's in a FA year. Plus you'd get the QO and pick. My reasoning: market conditions combined with even if Ray is ready by 2020 we still have Cain/Yelich/Gamel for 3yrs + Braun for 1 and Lutz will most likely be starting in AA at that point. While Gamel isn't as dynamic as Ray he's already shown the ability to be an above average MLB corner OF and is controlled through his prime years (and Miller Park will help with the power numbers). It's also very easy to trade for a vet OF (ie Granderson type) come the deadline too and cheap to sign one if needed moving forward. Ray isn't blocked but we also don't have a pressing need for him to be on this team like we do with Hiura and 2b. Also, when people on here constantly talk about players with options it's always surrounding them shuffling back and forth so the pen is always healthy/rested. Nobody ever talks about what it does come the trade deadline. What it does is allow Stearns to be able to acquire someone that bolsters a certain position making the team even better as he can option that other player to AAA as a depth piece and still have control of them heading into 2020. That's important.

Pina's BABIP has typically been 330 area with the Brewers (per half season) except the first half of 2018 he was 255 but still had a 7% BB rate and 18% K rate. He's typically hovering around an average MLB hitter, which translates into an *above average offensive player at his position*. Now factor in his great defense. Pina isn't the issue. The backup spot has been the issue. The Brewers shouldn't be throwing 13M/yr at a catcher. I'm banking on Kratz/Nottingham teaming up as the backups this year.

Santana's 2017 was better than anything Khris Davis has ever put up. His BA is 30pts higher, OBP 35pts higher but he doesn't hit 45HR. Which is the *only* reason Davis' OPS+ is going to be higher and is what it currently is as his BA/OBP are league average for DH (slightly below average for AL LF). It's like a pitcher having a really good FIP and you don't understand how that's possible and indicative of how one pitched based on a lot of their numbers until you look at the 1.5 BB9 rate then notice he also didn't hit any batters, which then skews the number. Through April 15 Santana had a 281 BA and 359 OBP he just wasn't hitting for power. His next 2wks he slumped hard. Then in May he slashed 292/346/846. He started 3-4 games through the first 3wks of June because everyone was healthy (Braun and Yelich had DL stints early) and was sent to AAA. So you can put his slash line in June all you want but lets not pretend he wasn't hitting and getting on base for 6 of the first 8 weeks...he just didn't hit for power at all in April which dragged that OPS down hard.

This is simply not true. Braun has had health issues, but when he's played he's remained a 30 HR, above-average offensive threat from a corner OF. But your reference to Braun cursing us with his "cheating" shows you have separate reasons for disliking him. Braun hasn't hit over 20 HR since 2016, and only cracked 30 once in the last 6 seasons, so to call him a 30 HR guy is a stretch. He's not wrong to say that a 2016 deal for Puig+McCarthy+prospects would be advantageous for us now while also affording us more payroll flexibility. I've defended Braun on here probably more than anyone because it's blatantly obvious he's still good. I agree it's a stretch saying Braun is still a 30HR guy even if he did it as recently as 2016. He's a 23-25HR guy right now if gets 500 AB. Regardless, he still has power. His 2015/2016 OPS+ was 130-135 and the past 2yrs he's 107-111 and, if not for hitting into plenty of bad luck, could have absolutely been 115-120 instead. His 2nd half this year he posted a 132 wrc+. His slash line last year doesn't come close to telling the story of how well he struck the ball. Clearly coolhandluke hates Braun and that's fine but at least don't lie about nonsense in the process of hating him. Calling his arm are liability is comical especially given it's clearly better than Cain/Yelich. He still rates as above average defensively in LF (DRS) too so because Yelich is capable of playing all 3 spots and is definitely better than Braun in RF it obviously makes sense for Yelich to go to RF as it makes the entire *OF unit better* thus making the *team* better. He's far from a liability anywhere and it's pathetic this conversation still has to occur. It's true in 2019 we'd have more flexibility if that Dodgers trade happened but McCarthy was trash last year and would have hurt this team. Plus we would have had a payroll of 10M more last year since we added Cain/Yelich too so maybe that could have played a role in preventing certain acquisitions from happening. Puig's been good though. This trade isn't sexy. But it makes the *team* better due to the roles of the players. Sometimes moving sideways in trades improves the team as well. Santana, while he performed extremely well off the bench the final 2 months, most likely wouldn't be doing that again moving forward. He needs consistent ABs whereas Gamel doesn't. He's been in the 4th OF role before and I personally think he'll be a very good 4th OF/bat off the bench making him a better fit for this team's makeup. Plus he comes with an extra year of control, 1 option (might not matter but always a benefit to have it) and is a lefty, something we lacked on the bench last year overall and in the OF group (until Granderson as Thames was both injured and unproductive the final several months). He has a better contact tool and even if his BB rate is between 2017/2018 it's still good and while he's been better vs righties over his brief career he's been pretty decent vs lefties outside of 2018. That said, Santana is clearly a better offensive player when given full run. But that doesn't make him a better fit for this team over Gamel. Also, Santana had a 6 DRS last year in RF over 433 innings - not that he's going to stay at his 2018 level defense but anybody that watched the first 2 months of last year would have clearly seen him take a huge leap forward defensively. He wasn't a liability at all out there last year. Gamel seems to be average in RF and below average in LF, which is weird given it's the easiest spot to play. Regardless, he's not a liability. One thing I've noticed from watching Gamel is that he plays defense like Phillips in that you'd think they were wearing helmets with pads - they're balls out on everything and will run through a wall if need be. Santana definitely does not have that aggressiveness out there so while he was liked by everyone I also think Gamel's personality fits in better as well.

It's different in that he costs next to nothing and we still have plenty of opportunity to make a better move. Solarte will very likely cost next-to-next-to-nothing. There are a lot of aspects that go into a signing like this though other than a quick look at their stats and the slight difference in cash. As an internet armchair GM I still don't like it. Solarte also has 1yr less control, is a slightly below average defender compared to Spangenberg being average (DRS), has 3yrs straight of declining production and is several years older. Matt Davidson is a corner IF. We don't need a corner IF. He also typically hits 30pts less (both BA and OBP) than Spangenberg. Here's my perspective on the signing. The Brewers 2b position hit 227/290/668 last year so anything above that is an improvement. Perez is coming off his 3rd straight year of offensive decline and he had 130 fewer PAs from 2017 to 2018. If Arcia is solid offensively then him, Shaw, Aguilar, Hiura (once up) aren't coming out of the game so the bat on the bench becomes more important than the glove, which is why I think Perez is traded between now and the deadline as his value lies on the defensive versatility side. And we'll still be covered on the bench with Dubon, Spangenberg, Saladino in backup roles. Spangenberg had a down year in 2018 but previously he was consistently slashing 265/325/725, which happens to essentially be what NL 2b averaged last year. His BB rate is also 3-3.5% better than Perez. I'd bank on him bouncing back closer to his pre-2018 numbers plus his exit velo/hard hit % have increased year over year since 2016. That's a pretty decent upgrade offensively at both the 2b spot and over Perez while still filling in at 3b/LF. 2yrs cheap control and a lefty. Good depth sign that doesn't prevent them from improving the 2b/depth spots even more. Saladino/Spangenberg can be solid pieces over the next couple years and cheaper than Perez.

You: Woodruff could be the IOG one day and then 2-3 days later he could follow a lefty Me: So what happens when Woodruff throws 75+ pitches to get through those first 3 innings on a random Monday start? You: Wait. And. See Awesome! Here's what's hilarious about all this. There hasn't been one person who's said they're *against* the piggybacking idea based on the current makeup of the team. *Not one*. There are people, myself included, who ask you questions to gain a better understanding of how this might look and play out, given you're mighty high on the idea, and then pick away at how aspects of it might not make sense or be plausible but you *ignore* all of those follow up points. Anytime somebody doesn't bow down in front of anything you say (like you do to your Uncle) you take it personally and then tell everyone they're the one's who are wrong. I asked you a simple question above and you couldn't even answer it. Other than Rudy Giuliani I've never seen anyone move the goalposts so much on a given topic. You started with 11-12 arms with each throwing 2-3 innings every 2-3 days. Then it shifted to using 8 starters and 5 pen arms - with 2 starters piggybacking off each other every day over a 4 day span while going 3 innings each (one time through the order not seeing anybody twice because you pointed out the numbers are much worse the 2nd, and the 3rd, time through) then being followed by pen arms. You said rotation arm/rotation arm/pen arm in a set schedule - I even laid out a Mon-Thur hypothetical in a different thread using the 8 pitchers you listed and asked you to confirm if I was understanding you correctly. You confirmed it, but said you might change who the actual matchups would be, which means the set schedule wouldn't be changed just the actual pitchers I listed on those specific days. Then it shifted to them throwing 4 innings each, potentially, instead of 2-3 (although not sure why given nobody should go through the order more than once according to you). Then it shifted away from the set schedule to a mixing and matching schedule where, according to you, it could hypothetically be Burnes for 3-4 then Claudio for 1-2 then Woodruff for 3-4. (this isn't even piggybacking so this can't be an option for you under your own theory as you specifically stated piggybacking/working in tandem at this point). Then it shifted to, hypothetically, Woodruff could start one game then 2-3 days later enter the game out of the pen replacing a lefty *and* allowing for playing matchups (it's open-ended here meaning there's zero clarification if the intent for him replacing the lefty is to go 3-4 innings and finish the game or if it's him in a straight 1 inning pen role, given we don't know how many pitches he would've thrown that first game in this hypothetical, which means he might not even be available to begin with regardless of which role it is. Also, if it's the 3-4 innings option then how are we able to play matchups when he's finishing the game?). Now it's shifted to: Wait. And. See. You went from 11-12 arms throwing 2-3 innings each while doing so every 2-3 days *to* "The Brewers are almost assuredly going to have a traditional 5 man rotation to start 2019" (you on Oct 16 *after* the previous statement was already made) *to* mix and match piggybacking / Wiat. And. See. AKA somebody's going to start the game and other guys are going to finish it. I don't how, I just know it's going to happen. There's a reason you *consciously refuse* to provide detailed hypothetical examples of how this might play out over the course of one week, factoring in certain variables like number of pitches thrown, matchups due to pinch hitters/double shifts, etc and how that might affect your hypothetical over the next few days or week as a result. It's because you'd be backing yourself into a corner and if it doesn't happen somewhat along those lines you'd be wrong and there's no way your ego can handle that. So you turn to drastically shifting the goalposts so that whatever happens you can always say you're right. *side bar - just another quick example of you lying on this site again. You said that Chacin was essentially piggybacked this year. Yeah, except there's zero evidence to support this. A rotation arm going 5 innings can't have a piggyback unless the next person in is a Woodruff/Burnes type who goes 3-4 innings. That never happened once. *it's no coincidence you started this thread after the Brewers started the playoffs 4-0 with 2 of those games being Woodruff starting vs CO going 3 innings with Burnes following him for 2 innings and the other game being Gio going for 2 innings followed by Woodruff 2 and Hader 3. Except that happened during the playoffs where you get frequent days off to recover unlike the regular season outside of a few small windows. *Nelson (as of now since he's full-go but that could change come ST), Chacin, Davies, Chase are the rotation arms and Stearns is still trying to acquire another leaving guys like Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Guerra in the pen as versatile swingmen with Hader, Knebel, Jeffress, Claudio acting as traditional pen arms typically pitching in the 7-9th innings. What Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Guerra allow this team to do is be non-traditional in that if a starter isn't on his game early they can replace him without "hoping" that person rights the ship through 5-6 innings like in the past so the pen doesn't get burned. If they need middle/late inning high leverage situation out of them they can do that too (mainly Burnes/Woodruff here). If they need a bullpen game using 2-3 of them to eat up 9 innings essentially giving the rest of the team a day off they can do that. If a starter is struggling they can put them on the 10 day DL and have one of these 4 guys start bringing up someone from AAA to backfill (ie Brown or Derby). If they need a one time spot start they have 4 options here depending who's fully rested at that point in time. What I'm describing is versatility out of these 4 allowing the Brewers to always put themselves in a position to stop any potential bleeding early or shut something down middle/late. What I'm describing here *isn't remotely close to what you've been describing* And what I'm describing here is what was happening in the 2nd half of 2018 and will continue to happen moving forward *if* they keep Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta, Guerra in that swingmen role...5 innings from a rotation arm then a lot of options for eating up innings and/or playing matchups late so the pen is never really overworked. #LongestPostEver

Part of making it work will be flexibility. Having a lot of arms and a lot of guys with options is necessary for it to work, and most teams don't have that, but it looks like the Brewers will in 2019. I don't think there is going to be a set pattern. At least I hope not. I still think that game situations and who is rested will still play the largest part in pitching changes. I'd hope that there are times when the Brewers are up by 5 and the IOG is looking great and humming along, and they just let him keep humming until he gives up a run/gets in serious trouble rather than taking him out in the 4th or 5th inning just because that is what the "plan" was if it was a close game or if he didnt look great. What worries me is that no matter how successful their innovations are most of the time, there will be a week at some point where we lose 2 or 3 games in row because of an odd rotation strategy. If we keep it up after a random blip like that will be the true test of how committed we are to the strategy--particularly if that bad stretch happens in April. Why can't this apply to a 0-0 score or us having anywhere between a 1-4 run lead? Why does it only apply when we're up 5+ right away? And what you're describing there isn't piggybacking.

This is why I don't think they go with any set piggybacks. That is - I don't think there will be a set IOG who is always matched with the same long man. Getting away from a set 5-man is one of the advantages so why counter with anything rigid. Woodruff could be the IOG one day and then 2-3 days later he could follow a lefty. Not only are you limiting trips through the order by one pitcher, you're also allowing yourself to dictate matchups. So what happens when Woodruff throws 75+ pitches to get through those first 3 innings on a random Monday start? He's definitely not going back out there 2 days later (Wed) and I highly doubt he's going back out there 3 days later either unless it's for 1 inning in a high leverage situation but that's not what you're talking about when using him. You're talking about 8 rotation arms that are going 3-4 innings at a pop within a 4 day span - mixing and matching piggybacks - with the other 5 pen arms working in. Except you're not even factoring in the number of pitches thrown (one of those pesky variables we keep harping on) - you're only discussing innings. Your theory literally only works if every rotation arm throws their 3 innings in less than 40 pitches or 4 innings in less than 60 pitches with there being somewhat of a set schedule where some flexibility exists but it's essentially set because guy's will need recovery time. Having guys mix and match, changing up who's piggybacking with whom only works if you run it like a 13 man pen except with 8 dudes who can throw 3-4 innings and you literally approach the season 1 inning at a time...you can't negate the fact guys need recovery time so they can't throw 3 innings on Mon then get back out there on Wed. Hader doesn't even do that and he came up as a starter. Also, Woodruff and Chacin are literally the only pitchers on the current roster that have done this. Chase, Davies, Nelson haven't even been in a pen role ever - Guerra has the final month of the past 2yrs but that was a straight pen role. Chacin did it for a handful of games in 2016 and he did it with 5 days rest while throwing 52-62 pitches spanning 4 innings each during those outings and 3 of the 5 outings he was entering the game between the start of the 2nd and 5th inning because the starter got shelled. So basically it's similar to when Guerra went 3 innings, 4ER vs Nats down the stretch with Woodruff entering going 4 innings of shut down ball (58 pitches) then Cedeno/Knebel went 1 inning each. Woodruff didn't pitch again for 7 days. Look at him in the playoffs - a lot of days off between starts and pen appearances for recovery (outside of game 7 because everyone is available then). The above is exactly what I and others have mentioned on here for what makes the most sense. The back half of the Top 10 Innings Pitched Leaders in 2018 averaged either 6 innings per start or just shy of 6.1. MLB managers overall aren't letting their pitchers go deep because of pitch counts, matchups, etc with analytics playing a big role. So this is how I said I interpreted "blurring the lines". We have rotation arms with the goal of going 5 innings (anything beyond that is a bonus because each additional out is one less the pen needs to get) giving up, ideally, 2 or fewer runs. Then we have 8 pen arms with the ability to go multiple innings eat up the rest of it. As of now our starters are most likely Chacin, Chase, Davies. It's not common for them to throw less than 5 innings. Chacin 5 of 32 games and 4 of 35 past 2yrs. Davies 3 of 28, 3 of 33 and wasn't good this year but was also pitching injured a decent amount. Chase 7 of 30, 3 of 25 and 9 of 30 this year (4 over final 8 starts). Nelson 6 of 32 and 2 of 29. They're clearly working on adding a rotation arm to lead this group and if that happens that person will have a very low number of starts under 5 innings. This aligns with this thought process - they're shooting for 5 innings (minimum) out of their rotation arms but if someone is humming along they keep going or if someone gets in trouble in the 3rd or 4th they'll be pulled because this pen allows for that to happen early to prevent a potential disaster thus keeping us in the game. Even if someone has a couple bad starts they can skip a start and use a Woodruff/Burnes/Peralta type to spot start. If the schedule aligns they can do a bullpen game like last year or also start Claudio vs Carpenter then bring someone in. None of that is traditional but it's nowhere near piggybacking. With the exception of Hader, the rest of the pen guys have the *ability* to go multiple but 90+% of the time they aren't actually going multiple. They're going 1 or 1+. Also, regarding having players with options being critical for this theory's success I just wanted to mention that dudes like Derby (and I like him) aren't going to be better than the Woodruff, Burnes, Peralta, Barnes, Williams, Albers of the world so why would we *consistently* swap out very productive arms for that of the Derby's of the world? We're always going to use the final pen spot to rotate guys in and out and that absolutely makes sense for a lot of reasons but that's also not what you're alluding to when you say it requires lots of players with options to work.

I get that you're not high on Ray and no issues with that. The disconnect is it's not about how you or I view Ray but how other teams do. And Ray seems to be carrying quite a bit of value after his AA season from what Stearns has alluded to as well as other teams being potentially interested in him in trades (ie CLE in a Bauer trade). And Profar missed most of 2014/2015 with a shoulder injury I believe. That was 3yrs ago.

The teams that are addressing their catching needs via FA right now most likely won't be targeting Realmuto come the deadline. I think Miami holds him until then because I don't see the return being much different at this point. Also, teams that are looking at Realmuto (ie Brewers) also might not look to acquire him at the deadline if their catchers are performing. So they very well might turn to other areas of need that could bolster their team down the stretch. I think if the Marlins were willing to meet in the middle between what teams are offering and their asking price that he would have been traded already. I highly doubt teams are low balling the Marlins. They might not be offering what they'd ultimately be willing to part with but there's no way they're low balling them. By all accounts now and dating back to the last deadline their asking price is absurd and unreasonable. I also personally feel that there are a limited number of teams that seriously in on Realmuto at this point. Staying in touch and keeping in contact isn't seriously in on him - half the league no doubt called to have a discussion then stopped pursuing once they heard the asking price.

I beg to differ - the Brewers absolutely haven't been capable of throwing a CG the past 3yrs (other than Nelson in 2017 and he almost threw 3 of them). Even when Chase killed it in 2017 it took him 100+ pitches just to get through 7 innings. The MLB CG number has dropped by 50% since Stearns became GM - it's a league wide cultural shift to limit the number of pitches thrown, which in turn limits innings. I read the "blurred lines" reference to Burnes/Woodruff/Peralta as pertaining to their flexibility and what it does for the team. If Chacin, Davies, Chase are set in the rotation (because they're productive still) and we acquire a Bauer type (hypothetical) or even resign Miley then have Nelson look good in spring since he's a full-go we only have 2 options: trade some of those dudes to create spots for the big 3 young guys *or* keep them in the pen because it makes the *team* better. And I've also said if Nelson needs to start in the pen to get going then that's great too with a young dude (Burnes) replacing him in the rotation. And because they're all legitimate rotation arms they offer the flexibility of covering 2-4 innings in case someone gives up 4 runs early or if we need a spot start or (depending on the schedule/days off) they roll with a bullpen game like they did last year or someone like Peralta could fill in as a starter in certain environments (ie CO) where someone might have a history of struggling there, etc etc. So these guys can be used as both starters and pen arms moving around as needed hence blurring the lines - they won't have a traditional rotation or pen role as they'll do both. I don't think this applies to the entire team though. It'll be sweet when we can add Brown at some point this year too. Having an entire pen of multi-inning arms serves as a great benefit for many reasons. If a starter is getting rocked early. If a starter is walking/giving up hits but not giving up runs and Counsell wants to pull them after 4 innings before they actually do start giving up runs. If we're getting blown out or blowing someone out it saves other pen arms when 1 dude can mop up 3 innings since the game is essentially already over, etc etc. The biggest issue I see with True Blue's piggyback/tandem/set schedule of 8 rotation arms every 4 days is that there are going to be games where guys get lit up so the 3 pitchers covering 9 innings isn't going to work. Then it throws off the schedule the following couple days. And a pen of Hader, Knebel, Jeffress, Claudio + 1 good vet arm if added (or Albers still) isn't going to allow for a constant revolving door, especially if we only have 4 bench players, because they're not going down unless they're like Knebel last year where he needed tweaking/mental break as he was struggling for a while. Also, if we acquire a Bauer type there's no way he's only throwing 3-4 innings. Most importantly I think, how many moves does Counsell make in the final 3 innings of a game based on matchups/analytics given we're in the NL and it's pinch hitters/double switches galore? A LOT, especially when Hader isn't in. Going with the 8 rotation arms every 4 days scheme means all of that is thrown out of the window because one of those starters would be, in theory, pitching the final 3+ innings every game (ie you mentioned Burnes 3-4, Claudio 1-2, Woodruff 3-4 in that order then they mix and match who starts the next time). There's just so many moving parts and variables in play on a nightly basis that if this theory, which has been discussed on this site for at least 3yrs, held water some MLB team would have implemented it already. I can absolutely see Counsell pulling starters in the 4th/5th inning if they're not *very* effective with one of these dudes taking over and throwing 2-3 innings shortening the game but that's not the piggybacking/tandem approach. It's allowing your starter to go as far as you deem them no longer effective then pulling them before risking something bad from happening putting us in a hole.

Right... more depth. But what consitutes as depth. 27 innings 3 games. You have arms that average 3 innings per stint you need 9 every 3 days. Counting no rest. Add knebel jeffress claudio. Theres 12. But it needs more depth. You mean like Guerra who has next to no role without short stints. Suter who is a long man. Woodruff who is mediocre if he can't pitch up his velocity at this point in his career. Peralta and Hader who need another pitch to be a starter by definition. You are using math to weave marginal talent and limted arsenals into elite results. It's said it needs more depth. It MAKES also-rans that depth. Low value pieces have real value. It won't stop anyone going good from going 4 ip either. But if you have 8-9 guys who can go a decent 3-4 ip and you let 1st time thru math take over we're starting to see what happens. Long extra inning games always hurt teams. This doesn't remedy that nor add to it. The goal is to win 3 of 5 games and achieve a certain era as cheaply as possible. Its great when you have a small lead and can put in a wipe out arm. That's not required for every win. However, when you can build an entire staff for the cost of 1 kershaw... then use that collection of stuff to limit 2nd looks and elimitate 3rd looks you get results. Team missed the WS because jeffress was gassed and the bats went cold for a few games. They'll continue to blur the line between starter and reliever. We already did that a great deal. More is coming. Having woodruff burnes peralta nelson? Suter? Davies? More than last year... with our next up Brown closing in makes that even easier. You should be expecting more 4ip "starts." More 3 ip relief appearences. Even less short stints. Claudio is not coming here to loogey. He's coming here to throw mutiple innings at a time because 1 results, 2 another odd look to the collection. No big investment... few huge talents needed... lots of good... and some of that good is very overlooked due a league full of teams with different expectations of their arms. Teams starting Guerra Suter Woodruff would be laughed at. Us rolling them out there for 2-3 ip works. This teams looking for a way to collect MORE starters on the roster at 1 time... and use them even shorter stints than last year. Guerra/Suter/Woodruff as 3 of our 5 rotation arms is never going to happen to begin with. Additionally, Suter has proven he's a solid backend MLB rotation arm that gives us a chance to win almost every time he takes the mound and he's even better in a pen role - his numbers this year ballooned as he pitched a bit while injured. Woodruff, before he lost his prospect status, was hovering around a Top 50 and it's already been proven he's had success when in a consistent starting role (hint: he wasn't in that role in 2018). Evidence within the correct context trumps opinion. Peralta doesn't need another pitch to be successful and called a "starter" he needs better control/consistency to reach his potential as a starter. If a starter is throwing 4ip, 1h, 0er, 1bb, 4k over 50 pitches they're not being removed from the game because every additional out they consume is one less out the pen has to get. Jeffress was gassed in the playoffs? Look at the game log and days off/number of pitches. He also threw 10.2ip, 3h, 0er in September in 10 appearances throwing 14 or fewer pitches 7x. Then he had that neck injury or whatever it was before the playoffs, wasn't available to pitch at the end of the regular season then never looked comfortable in Oct as a result of that.

So basically something like: Mon - Chacin/Burnes (3 innings each = 1 time through for most part) Tues - Peralta/Woodruff Wed - Nelson/Anderson Thur - Davies/Guerra Then Hader/Knebel/Jeffress/Claudio/+ 1 multi-inning pen arms take over each game...other arm maybe a revolving door type due to having options. Then rinse and repeat? Am I interpreting this correctly?

The Brewers are no doubt going with 13 arms so what will this look like then come April, hypothetically...

I don't get the LOOGY talk thus far regardless of what his splits are. The past 3yrs he's thrown 203 innings over 175 appearances and each year throwing more innings than appearances as well. Additionally, someone mentioned that the Rangers were one of the least shifting teams and weren't good defensively whereas the Brewers are the opposite for the most part. Therefore, our defense could take away some singles/doubles that he's been giving up vs righties as he's always dominated lefties (every team in our division has a couple of their better/most productive hitters as lefties too - or switch hitters that are worst as righties). He's averaged giving up 4.5HR the past few years (both to righties and lefties equally) so righties aren't tagging him deep, they're hitting singles and doubles. Hader gave up 9HR last year as a comparison. He's also averaged 75 innings the past 2yrs (Hader just threw 81). He doesn't have to throw 2 innings but it's great that he has the ability to go more than 1. And with a 63% GB rate, which is crazy, that bodes well for us given our park and our defense. Plus he has a crazy low BB rate, which is what you want from a pen arm. Claudio is a proven and durable lefty pen arm with 3yrs cheap control during our best window to compete for a WS in 35yrs whereas a draft pick is an unknown. And if the Rangers hit on the 40th pick it doesn't mean the Brewers would have drafted that same player either. Stearns just improved the pen from last year - a pen that was already super good. I personally really like this move.

Yelich is actually 9 months younger than Realmuto, and I'm sure he was referring to at the time of the trade...which means Yelich was 1 year and 9 months younger at his time of trade than Realmuto will be at his likely time of trade. I guess you can call him wrong over 3 months if you want, but he was mostly right on the 2 year comment. Also catchers get hurt far more and don't play as many games as outfielders, hence why you see so outfielders getting a ton of big contracts while catchers are signed to smaller deals. Outside of Posey, the biggest catcher contract I can think of is Russell Martin's 5/82. There are a ton of outfielders signed to over $100 million deals. I don't think the catcher position being a premium position is going to get the value you are anticipating. Speaking in certainties isn't foolish. At 7pm CST tonight I'm *certain* it's going to be dark outside. It depends on the subject matter. If Realmuto lands a package of (1) Top 20, (1) Top 65, (1) Top 100 + another halfway decent prospect, which is very similar to Yelich, then I'll be the first to say I was way off base then you can use me as an example of it being foolish. I'm not comparing them as if they're both LFs. Also, and again, Yelich isn't a LF. He won a GG in LF and literally just came off playing an entire season in CF. We then moved him to RF but he fills in at both LF and CF because *he's versatile*. That's extremely valuable, especially when you have his bat. Realmuto being a catcher doesn't make up for an additional 3yrs of control. You're literally saying Yelich wasn't, at the time, a GG caliber LF because he was moved off LF and forced to play CF between 2 AS players. Yikes. Yelich had a DRS of 13, 13, 6 in LF then Ozuna came up and needed a spot because *he* can't play anywhere other than LF. But guess who's versatile enough to shift to CF? That's right - Yelich. And if you want to call his defense there below average (-6 DRS) then I won't disagree. But you can't say that out of one side of your mouth while saying Realmuto is *very good* defensively outside the other when his DRS the past 3yrs is -7, -5, -13. It's one or the other, not whatever fits your narrative. And I never said Yelich is a CF. By saying he played a full season in CF the year he was traded, and after winning a GG earlier in LF, it *clearly* points to his defensive versatility. The Brewers can get by with him in CF if need be whereas someone like Braun they couldn't because he's not capable of being serviceable there if needed. Yes, KeithStone, it was blatantly obvious I was comparing both at the time of their trades hence 2yr age difference - Yelich heading into age 26 season while Realmuto heading into age 28 season. Because that's what you do when comparing trades - you compare them at the time they each happen. I don't know what it means when you say Yelich's trade was under the radar - it's as if you're alluding to the fact almost no other teams were involved as opposed to everyone knowing Realmuto is available and wanting him. Why in the world would Miami handicap themselves and not speak with other teams about Yelich - it was even made public that Yelich didn't want to be there and Miami said they weren't going to trade him then they said everyone has a price. Every team that had the means to acquire Yelich, and wanted him, no doubt had conversations with Miami just like what's happening with Realmuto. To imply otherwise is foolish.