FmrBeerMan

That is one of the worst things I have ever read on here. (Been reading consistently for about a year just starting posting) How does that make any sense? Explain.

But it really hasn’t. In the two years he produced well. The two years that everyone seems to basing his career on they were .26 and .21 below the league average. The other years were he is a four ERA pitcher they have been at the league average. What that tells me is he does need to be exceptional in that category to be the pitcher we would want buying. Then moving to Miller Park that seems unlikely.

Not in free agency. If both options are executed Archer will be 4 years / $33.75M. The Cubs just signed Chatwood for 3 years / $38M. By trade? Per Fangraphs WAR, Archer was tied with Kershaw at #9 in 2017. Greinke was #7, so we could probably trade for him if we had the ability to pay him $34-35M per year for the next four seasons. I don't think there are many others out there in this tier of pitching that are available. All told, Archer's probably comparable to Quintana, for whom the Cubs gave up a boatload of prospects last season. If we want to get someone who is somewhat cost controlled for more than a year or two, we're either going to have to get him from the farm or give up a whole lot of young talent in trade. I'm not all in on trading for Archer, but I'm not against it. It just depends on the price. We can afford to part with one of Santana / Brinson, as we have a lot of good MLB ready outfielders. I hate losing high-minors pitching, as someone like Burns or Ortiz has the potential to give us six solid years. Stearns needs to determine what guys he's comfortable giving up, and if the price tag is too high, we don't make the trade. But it is all subjective. Yes fangraphs has him 7th. Baseball Reference has him 155th. I would rather give a couple bounce back candidates a shot at that point, or a vet looking to hold on for one more year like CC (48th) rather than sell the farm for Archer. The guys that are being talked about being traded like Ortiz, Brinson, Dubon are 100% going to play in the Majors guys. Guys that it hurts for a small market to give up. Like it was said above Brewers should be looking to move vets and bring up prospects all the time. That is the approach I would love to seem them take. Then buy guys at the deadline by trading in 1 for 1 ones, like we did last year with Swarzak. To me that is key to having sustainable long term success for Milwaukee.

Overall to me and I should have posted this above. The floor is just too low to trade for him. Yes you could get the 3.2 ERA pitcher from 2015 but you also could get the 4 ERA pitcher he has shown the last couple years. The variance is just too high for me to give up three maybe even four top prospects for him. Yes I believe that will be the price as we got four for a season and a half of Gomez and what was left of Fiers.

The average MLB HR rate increased by .25, Archer’s increased by .425, that is significant. His increase was .175 greater than the MLB over that time.

According to FanGraphs here https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-recent-history-of-free-agent-pricing/, the value of one war in 2017 was $10.5 million, with a projected 7% growth rate, would be $11.2. We could argue Baseball Reference vs FanGraphs all day. I didn’t feel like doing a more in-depth dive just a quick Calc. But I think it points to the problem with Archer hard to determine his value, because his peripherals are so much better than what his traditional numbers are. So it comes down to what to individual teams value. But my overall point was that if this is price I don’t want the Brewers to be involved.

Goodbye farm, hello window. I got the impression Stearns is trying to avoid the window theory and be consistently competitive. This is the path I would like to see us tread down. Avoid the window theory be consistently competitive and we shall see what happens. I would rather take an extra couple of years waiting for prospects and continuing to build the farm. Try to be consistently competitive like the Cards, rather than having to go through a rebuild all the time after a few years of having a shot.

I didn’t believe it either. So I verified it with some internet research. I will cite a source even if it is from the evil St Louis Fans. https://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2017/10/16/16477814/cardinals-chris-archer-trade-analysis

Villar has played the equivalent of 3 seasons in Major League Baseball in terms of Games. With only two being able to Start/Play in 3/4 of them. One he posted a amazing season the other awful. I don’t seen how you can write him off as a known quantity at this point. By your logic Jimmy Nelson was a known quantity before last season too and the Brewers should have written him off. Going into the season Jimmy was a career 3.9 WAR in three season and Villar a 2.9.

Manaea is not nearly enough for Santana in my opinion. Also I think he does not profile well for Miller Park at all. Hr/FB ratio of 11.4% for his career while pitching in Oakland. And this year they are projecting it so sit in the 14% range which is awful. No thanks! I probably wouldn’t even want him in a package for Santana.

***Deleted

I don’t see them doing either one of those deals above. It took two years to build a farm system up and we talk about sustainable success. If we want sustainable success instead of cyclical success we cant be selling 5 guys who all seem to be on a path to contribute at the major league level for 1 arm. Archer’s performance and contract are too good. I actually think he has out performed his contract so much that he is near untradable unless the Rays sell him for significantly less than he is worth. With a bidding war going on that is unlikely. So for the Crew I hope they pass.

I just don’t see anyway this deal gets done. Archer has a projected $147 million in surplus value. So even if you have Brinson and his projected $86 million in value you are still $61 million short. So add Ortiz (22.9) and Isan Diaz (28.6) and we are still $10 million short. So even if the Rays sell at a discount, which they really have to due to the steal of a contract he is on for four years, then we need to ask are the Crew comfortable giving up Brinson, Ortiz, Diaz, and likely +1 for Archer. These numbers are not the most accurate just a quick calculation (if anything I might be overpricing the Brewers Prospects a little as most fall toward the end of the respected ranges) I would love to have Archer but at the price above that just seems to high.

I would disagree that he has shown the ability to be a starter in the league. I will say however that given a game plan to fit his skill set, he is maybe a top 5, definitely a top 10 backup QB in the league. I would put him in the same lane a Hoyer, McCown, Glennon. Could potentially start if in the right situation but probably best suited for a backup.

Breakout: Grisham (Clark) - Finished his mechanical changes and help a high OBP through all of it showing disclipline of the zone. Now will get back to just hitting the ball like he did in high school. Bounce Back: Diaz - I know it is not a big shock or anything or huge bounce back but I’m going with Diaz. I think leaving Carolina will be huge for him. Also love the Nottingham pick Bust: Gatewood - Will continue further down the no contact path. Sleeper: Feliciano - Catcher so the numbers wont jump at the plate. But will get better and prove he can handle it behind the dish. Also like Pennington here.

I know it is not the sexy pickup but I would grab Trevor Cahill. Can pitch out of the rotation until (Guerra, Chase, Woodruff) come back and then can just shift over to the pen and solidify things there. Bargain basement price and has playoff experience with being on 2015 cubs team.

Overpay by Kelly's Bleachers

Pass on Stroman, cost high in terms of prospects we would have to give up and serious durability concerns based on his frame. Frame has nothing to do with durability. If Stroman is available, I'd make a significant offer to get him as I think he's at least on par with Quintana. Tom Gordon had a similar frame and how long was his career? Disagree, look at Lincecum. 5 years and then done. Also Gordon was a reliever after 1996 when 8 years into career he flamed out as a starter. David Cameron stated the prevailing theory about durability in an article in Baseball Prospectus: “There is validity to the belief that shorter pitchers have a smaller margin for error. In order to generate the same power as a pitcher with more natural strength, they can tend to put more pressure on their arms, thus leading to poor mechanics and eventual injuries."

Pass on Stroman, cost high in terms of prospects we would have to give up and serious durability concerns based on his frame.

I'm not on board with adding a starter. But this is one I am ok with. Clears the spot for Brinson, adds a starter with control next year that we might be able to trade and replace a Broxton level player (when we acquired him).