True Blue Brew Crew

Some good points here. Peralta definitely needs to figure out why he starts each outing so slow. That's plagued other pitchers before and has proven to be correctable. The hope is that with growth and experience his first inning wildness goes away. The one time he repeated a level his control improved dramatically. That will be something to watch if he breaks with the big club out of spring training. My prediction is that he's in Milwaukee from day one. And for sure, small samples for both. Woodruff does have good control so that's a big plus for him. As said by someone above, this is a great problem to have. Woodruff just needs to develop a 3rd pitch. His troubles going through an order even a 2nd time are real. That's no fluke. When you throw a straight fastball and only have the slider to go with it, batters are tuned in and ready to tee off on a repeat viewing. Woodruff really needs that 3rd pitch. The awesome news is that pitchers refine command (Peralta) and add 3rd pitches (Woodruff) all the time. And worst case these guys can very effectively be used the way they already have. I think people forget the success Peralta had as a starter. And Woodruff has shown he can be a force for 2-3 innings. Plenty of reason to expect more growth from both, especially Peralta given his age.

Oh and did I mention one is 22 and the other turns 26 in February?

When you look at Woodruff's average fastball velocity as a starter as opposed to relief, he like most pitchers isn't going to throw as hard if called on to pitch 5-6 innings like a starter traditionally would. So if you've got Woodruff throwing 95 straight as opposed to 97 straight and compare that to Peralta at 92 with movement and extreme extension that deceptively equates to an extra 3 mph, you've essentially got both throwing 95 as starters. One just happens to have ridiculously more movement. The great news for Woodruff is that he may never be called on and expected to give 5-6 innings. He can be used very effectively and invaluably for 3-4 innings, even potentially as an initial out getter. And if he develops a 3rd pitch, even better.

Both are essentially 2-pitch pitchers at this point. Woodruff is 4-seam fastball and slider. Peralta is 4-seam fastball and curve. Where Peralta separates himself and why he had more success multiple trips through is three-fold. One, Peralta has far greater movement on his fastball. Two, his unearthly extension allows him to release the baseball so much closer to the plate than average that it acts to add the hitter equivalent of nearly 3 mph on his fastball. And three, Peralta throws two distinctively different fastballs with different actions almost split equally, essentially acting as a 3rd pitch. He throws his 4-seam and also throws one where he rotates his grip and it acts as a cutter. The movement on Peralta's fastball is not often seen in major league baseball. It gives him a huge advantage over Woodruff. You can't teach that kind of movement. You either have it or you don't. Please don't take this as knocking Woodruff or even saying Peralta is better (though I do think he is). This is info sharing to give people a better idea of the facts of both.

Oh where to begin...

Correction to the initial post - Woodruff's struggles begin his 2ND time through (.889 OPS 2nd time through). The Brewers never even let him go a 3rd time through, even in his starts. He faced all of 2 batters all season a 3rd time through the lineup. Peralta actually had good splits his 3RD time through, a dominant BAA and is the one of the two who has actually had success as a starter. Woodruff has shined as a reliever. I see the poster two above me said with regard to Peralta, "hitters seem to get him with more at bats". That a great descriptor for Woodruff and couldn't be farther from the truth for Peralta. The only starting pitcher in the majors who matched Peralta's batting average against of .178 was Blake Snell of Tampa Bay. Peralta's 3rd time through OPS against (.574) was actually lower than the 1st and 2nd time through for him. And in his postseason appearance he put up a line matched only once before in MLB history by some guy named Pedro Martinez. Perception continues to lead people to say some very inaccurate things about Peralta. I don't think I've ever witnessed a more misunderstood pitcher.

Not to get too clancy on everyone but that description OnaBdger58 posted, if read carefully, could equal Woodruff (high end pitching prospect) and Aguilar (position player). It doesn't say position player "prospect". And Woodruff could very easily equate to a high end pitching prospect given his MLB playoff dominance. Just sayin'

Bullpen guys in general are making more money. Not just save guys. Rockies just gave Jake McGee $27 million over three years. The game is changing, hence, contracts will change with it.Don't think for a second that Hader won't command a ton of dough even if he's never primary closer. Exactly. The money will get spent, just spread differently.

And people say Peralta isn't being thrown into every trade.

When there are 1 inning guys like Soria making $10 million per, it's clear that it won't be difficult at all for the money to be spread more evenly through a pitching staff. A guy like Hader is going to get paid because the stats and common sense say he's more valuable than a 1 inning set-up guy. The most money always goes to the best guys.

100 pitches once every 5 days is an absurdly unnatural physiological use of muscles and tendons. If you need 4 days off to recover from the taxation you've put on a body part, you're overdoing things. Think about bodybulding and exercise. Shorter bursts that require 1-3 days rest before once again working the same muscle group is much more natural. Maxed 60 pitch outings followed by 2-3 days rest max are not only more natural for the body, they're statistically advantageous for pitchers vs hitters. Not only from the standpoint of lessened consecutive exposures to a batter, but the ability to win match-ups with your 2 best pitches and not having to utilize a weaker 3rd or 4th. Rather than the different look coming from a pitcher's weak 3rd and 4th offerings, the different look comes from a fresh arm throwing his 1-2 best pitches. Huge advantage to pitchers.

I don't even need to prove that shortened outings from initial out getters will be sustainable because the numbers are already out there staring everyone in the face. The average starting outing is under 6 innings. Bullpens are already covering more innings than ever before. The shift isn't from shortening starters, that's already happened. The real shift is lengthening the stints of your relievers. What's funny is that everyone's focus is on the starters. The transition for the Brewers has everything to do with getting away from guys who are only good for 1-2 innings. That's what's going to take some time. You can't just cast off Jeffress and Knebel. They actually have the arms to piggyback and tandem NOW. The future 12-man staff is made up of a dozen pitchers who are all geared to go at least 3 innings. Your best guys will go 4-5 with the rare 6 and be supplemented with guys who regularly go 3-4 with the rare 2. Eliminate the 1 out and 1 inning guys and you have more than enough coverage. 9 x 162 = 1458 innings If by some miracle a team uses the same 12 pitchers all year, that workload spread out is 121.5 innings per pitcher. Giving more innings to your best guys, say 150 innings, and less to the guys who are only effective once through, say 90 innings, is not only sustainable, it's extremely efficient and practical. And that's without even dipping beyond the initial 12 man staff, which of course the team will. Sustainability over the course of a full season is a complete non issue. This model is actually easier on pitcher's arms.

Lol, what team has the horses to go 7 regularly? Even the big markets are lucky if they have 1. And are said horses putting up .500 to low .600 OPS against in those 5th, 6th, 7th innings? If the Brewers ever get ONE of those guys they won't be able to keep him. By limiting pitchers to 2 trips through there's a huge statistical advantage to be had. Woodruff's OPS against goes from .582 to .889 the 2ND time through. Can you imagine a team where the worst pitcher's OPS against is in the 600s? And it's cost effective for small markets as well. You can call it nonsense all you want but it's coming so you may as well get used to it. And honestly looking at the data, the Brewers would be committing an egregious error not to go this route. Much rather to be ahead of this trend than behind.

I think there are more with you than you suspect. Hiura only goes if Realmuto is signing an extension if it were up to me. And since I think that's very unlikely, I'm betting on Keston getting the call to Milwaukee for a long enjoyable run starting in June.

You may as well throw up the closed sign then as CC is about to re-up with the Yankees. Sorry to deliver the bad news.

Yeah like I said, I don't even go that far unless I'm very confident in Realmuto signing an extension. Including Hiura in the deal shifts the team weakness to 2B but at least that's easier to fill than C. But Hiura is not going to Miami if it looks like I'm only getting 2 years of Realmuto. Since it's a slim chance Realmuto is willing to sign a deal right now, I'd say the chances of the Brewers dealing for him are slim to none.

Once young pitchers have success in the majors, what small markets trade them for anything? My memory no doubts needs refreshing but what mid size and large market teams are out there trading young, MLB proven arms? The Brewers shouldn't be trading any of those 3 unless they're convinced one of them tops out as a reliever (cough Woodruff /cough). And even then, if they're going the tandem route, they should be hanging on to all 3. Woodruff, Hiura + flyer prospects should be the highest the Brewers offer for Realmuto. And that's only if they're confident they have the budget and a good read on his willingness to sign an extension. With Yelich being one of his best pals, maybe there's a chance of that level of comfort existing. Otherwise the Brewers shouldn't be trading young MLB arms and their heir apparent at another weak position for a player of 2 years control.

That's specifically what I'm referring to. Given his age and dominance, he should be looked at as the least expendable of the 3. If people are going to be creating all these hypothetical trades, you'd think they have Woodruff in there as the headlining arm. I've been around sports forums long enough to know that if people realized what the Brewers had in Peralta he'd be on most people's untouchables list. Instead just about every trade proposal has him name in it. It's astonishing. Personally, given the multiple inning arms needed to build the type of 12-man staff I know is coming, I don't think they should or would trade any of those 3. But if they think they have enough coverage, I believe Woodruff would be the one they'd move.

Peralta throws strikes. Using Pitch Info data from Fangraphs, had he qualified for the ERA title, he would have been 16th amongst MLB starters in Zone% (percentage of pitches thrown in strike zone). His Zone% was 50.8%; MLB starter average was 48.1%. There might be a question about quality strikes or that he relies so heavily on one pitch, but he fills the zone pretty well. Peralta is 2 years younger than Burnes, 3 years younger than Woodruff, while posting more dominant numbers than both in the majors yet people continue to add him in trades like he's a throwaway piece. It's mind-blowing. Thankfully he's going nowhere.

Why would we gamble in Forsythe bouncing back, when we could gamble on Schoop (a better player) bouncing back. I'm not endorsing either player but the obvious answer would be $$$

I'd like to see them pry Brian Bannister away from the Red Sox. He's their current assistant pitching coach and VP of pitching development. I think he's a strong fit for what they're looking to do going forward. 37 year-old, former MLB pitcher, big on Sabermetrics and statistical analysis. ETA, I see his name was raised in the first post. I have to believe CC will be seeking to talk with Bannister. Hopefully the interview is granted.

Not good which is why I'd safely take him off the list of possibilities for the Brewers.

Heck, if the hire comes from Tampa Bay I'll be of the belief that the Brewers low-balled Johnson so they could free up the spot. Then we'll see how many here start to believe in what I've been saying is coming with the usage of the pitchers. Tampa is probably the only team ahead of Milwaukee on this path so why not hire from there.

At least when they sign Cabrera, everyone will be well versed as to why. And that's not a guarantee, but given that the best fit already signed (Eduardo Escobar), I think Stearns will be a little more aggressive getting Cabrera. Btw, the one team that ranked higher in DRS than the Brewers were the Dbacks, who were quick to lock up Escobar before free agency. I think Stearns would've been all over Escobar.

Shaw was not called on to have any level of range whatsoever. He held up fairly decently because they had him positioned so well and converted outs into outs. He wasn't taking hits away from anyone. Other than of course when they had him lined up in a spot that other teams would have had no one. Baltimore is one of the worst teams in baseball at advance scouting and utilizing positioning and shifts. It's one of the reasons Stearns was so hot after so many of their pitchers. Take any Orioles pitcher and have them pitch in front of the Brewers positioned defense and it shaves about a run and a half off their ERA. It's that dramatic. It's 100% the most important factor in team defense. You could have a team full of poorly positioned gold glovers save fewer defensive runs than a team with mere average and above average glovers who are positioned correctly. You can't field what you're not in position to glove. Skill-set is not entirely irrelevant. Travis Shaw is a great example. He's sound enough capturing ball into glove and throwing said ball accurately to the right base. That's not asking him to have amazing range, quick hands, or a canon for an arm. But you can have a defense that saves run with a Shaw put in the right spots. Defensive runs saved is absolutely a team stat. If your organization correctly scouts, positions, and pitches to initiate contact to where you have your 9 defenders positioned it will save runs. And your individual defenders don't have to be elite to be a leader in DRS. The Brewers have 2 elite defenders and a bunch of average ones. Yet placement combined with pitch selection allowed the team to finish 2nd in DRS. Without the organization's heavy emphasis on shifts, placement, and it's marriage with pitch strategy, this team's defensive effectiveness would be middle of the pack at best with these position players. What I've said multiple times is that he's been adequate at 2B outside of NYM and PHI which are two very poor teams at positioning. He amassed -31 DRS at 2B in the past 2 years with the Mets and Phillies. His 6 year total at 2B is -21 meaning he saved 10 runs at 2B the four years prior. All I've ever said is he'd look a lot better playing 2B for the Brewers and to me that is obvious. People are writing him off as a butcher when if positioned correctly he'd be fine and his bat would be a big plus up the middle.