monty57

Issue is he interfers with Walsh & Villars playing time. The Brewers could always trade him while eating his salary, which would give him value on the trade block. In that case, the Brewers pay $12M for the good Arizona prospect plus whatever they can get in trade for Hill.

I would as well, but the ultimate value of a player is what they can receive on the open market, so if Upton is worth $22M/year, then Davis should be worth what? 18M? Over the next four seasons, Upton is going to make around $88M, while Davis will probably make around $10M. There is a lot of excess value in that, and therefore, teams should give up a lot in terms of prospects in order to get him. Certainly a lot more than I would have guessed prior to doing the quick comparison to Upton for my earlier post. Davis doesn't have a real long track record, so in an ideal world, we could trade Braun now (I agree with Polish Falcons and Boomer5 that deals like this make Braun more tradeable). Then we could put Santana in RF, give Davis everyday play in LF, hoping he has another .800+ OPS with 30+ HR, making him extremely valuable, either playing alongside Phillips, Arcia, etc, or trading him for younger players to add to the "core." We have Arcia and Phillips as our standout prospects. If Braun and Lucroy could each bring back another guy in that age/talent range, and then in a year get another one for Davis, well.. that would be a pretty good core of talent to build around for the next decade, with a lot of talent in the low minors that should add to that core as they develop.

Yeah, to me the comments were about as transparent as someone saying "It's not you, it's me" when breaking up with their significant other... of course it's you!! You can analyze the exact words he used, but the intent was quite clear.

here have been posters on this site who have bemoaned the lack of clubhouse leadership the past few years, probably since the departure of Prince, and I have been one of those guys. This speaks volumes to me that Lucroy is not a team leader in the sense that a leader figures out a way to lead instead of complains about the hand he's dealt. Agree. The "leaders" on the team have been Gomez, who is the opposite of discipline, Lucroy who seems discontent with anything in life, and Braun who recently sat out for a season watching his team play, probably elevating the previous two to "team leader" status. That in and of itself won't necessitate highly erratic play for the team, but it probably doesn't help. To Lucroy's comments, I can see how players could be frustrated with the current situation, which could be exacerbated by the new GM, with actions like not even talking to Lind once in the period between when he was named GM to the day Lind was traded. True or not, this kind of paints a picture of him being the proverbial "stat geek" who looks at things on paper and doesn't come out of the ivory tower into the mundane world of real life. Hopefully a little experience (and maybe some guidance from Melvin) can help him learn the personal aspect of being a GM, who should have some "team leader" in him. At the end of the day, the reason the team is rebuilding is that the players on the team were not good enough to compete, so before getting too ticked off about the situation, they should realize that they are the ones whose play led them into the situation. All in all, Lucroy should have been more tactful, as he was essentially telling his teammates they aren't very good, while telling other GMs that he wants out. Analyze every word if you want, but other GMs will read between the lines, which is not too difficult to do from his comments. But the statements are not the reason he should be traded. He should be traded because that is the best baseball move for the Brewers at this point, and trading him should bring back players that will increase our odds of winning, at which point we will add talent to the MLB team instead of trading it away.

They're not exactly apples-to-apples, but the Gomez/Fiers trade is a bogey for us to see what we could potentially return in a Lucroy trade. To me, a return of anything similar talent-wise heavily outweighs the value of keeping Lucroy on the Brewers for another year or two. As I mentioned earlier, I envision getting another player of similar talent and expected MLB debut date to Arcia and Phillips. That would give us a very solid core to build around for a whole lot of years. Any additional players that come over would likely be a little younger, and hopefully would reach the majors and provide league-minimum talent when the aforementioned core starts to make some money.

Ha Ha. That was quite a hijacking. As to Smith, there is no way a lefty setup guy should be considered a "core piece." He's pretty cemented into a reliever role, and we have enough MLB ready starters that I don't see him getting a chance as a starter. He is in his first year of arby, so we have control through the 2018 season. To me, it really depends on the market for him. The trick is that we know Smith is an MLB player, and we probably wouldn't get a huge return for him. If we could get a good return for him, then take it. However, if we can't get a good return, then there's no reason to trade him just because he's hitting arby. Unlike Lucroy (huge potential return that could vanish with another concussion) or Lind (final season, potential QO candidate, back injury risk), there is little risk in holding on to Smith, and there is reason to believe that a desperate team could overpay at the deadline for a dominant lefty reliever. So, he won't be here four years from now. If we get a good offer trade him now, but it's perfectly okay to start the season - and maybe even next season - with him on the MLB roster.

Upton and Khris Davis are the same age. Here are their 3-year stat line splits: Upton .262 avg / .344 OBP / .470 SLG / .814 OPS 82 HR Davis .250 avg / .315 OBP / .494 SLG / .809 OPS 60 HR Davis has had less playing time during this period (2013 was his first year in the majors, and he split time with Parra last year), so Upton has more value, but if Upton is worth $22M/year, then Davis is a very valuable commodity.

This is all a shell game and a fantasy that I'm not buying. Sorry. Briggs, I honestly am one who likes reading your posts. I wish you would write a book on the history of the Brewers, and I would be first in line to buy it. But recently you have become awfully grumpy about Brewer management, and I can't understand what you are hoping will occur. The Brewers had a mediocre farm system and an MLB team with an overbudget payroll that was likely losing the owners money while sitting near the bottom of the standings. For years, they had been getting older and more expensive, while signing band-aid free agents trying to beat the long odds against them making the playoffs. At some point, they had to realize that they needed to change tack before it was too late. They got lucky that Gomez and Lucroy became superstars after signing team-friendly deals, making them two excellent trade chips. What they alone bring back to the team could make us relevant again sooner rather than later. Holding on to them to free agency would have left the future of the team in shambles. So, since they decided to start at least something of a rebuild, why would they hold onto guys like Lind and K-Rod? Might as well get something that might help in the future for guys who are only here short-term. No one likes to lose, but recent moves (including changing draft strategy a couple years ago) at least give us a shimmer of hope that brighter days are ahead, which is something I haven't been able to say about this team since the 2011 season ended. This is the season to let young talent play, and bring in guys whose value has dropped to see if they can rebound. Most won't, but maybe one or two will. This is not the year to sign more "Loshe-type" deals, bringing in second-tier MLB talent in hopes of winning a couple more games. By the time the real talent comes up (Arcia, Phillips, and hopefully someone in a Lucroy trade), they have figured out what they have in guys like Davies, Jungmann, Santana, Broxton, Cecchini, etc. They will then be able to add supplementary pieces to replace those that don't work out. We are in an inevitable stage of the game, and I like the way Stearns is handling it.

However, the point remains that if you have a nuclear rebuild and have 5-6 stud players all making league minimum, you have a short term window to supplement said players with short-term fillers on the positions that you missed at during your rebuild. ...and if you have talent at all levels of the system, you should be able to continually replace guys who leave with guys making league minimum, keeping the payroll manageable. To topic, a Lucroy trade will help with this. He could probably bring back a stud who is near MLB ready to go along with Arcia and Phillips to be a very solid group to build around for 6+ years (assuming some extensions for the stars). Plus, he should bring in some good players in the lower minors who could help around the time the aforementioned group near arby, and around the time Braun's contract is nearing it's end (assuming he's still around) and guys like Nelson are nearing free agency, potentially allowing them to be traded rather than being lost for nothing.

Personally I don't want to see Lucroy traded in spite of the rebuild situation, but I'm very aware it's a possibility. . . . . I'm also not sold on the likelihood that the total tear-down approach is the Brewers' absolute best option given that at least 3 other teams seem to be in the exact same position (Reds, Braves, Phillies) and the more teams there are taking that approach, the less likely any one individual team will achieve the desired outcome. . . . Personally I'm also skeptical of the long-term sustainability of the Cubs/Astros approach. The Cubs now have basically abandoned that since they're now spending huge money left and right, and the Astros only barely made the playoffs, made several prospects-for-vets deals at the deadlines, and there's no guarantee they're headed toward a better 2016 than their 2015. I like what the Brewers have done thus far -- I think it's what they've needed to do -- but I'd still rather that Stearns' vision is uniquely his own, not a total copycat like many here essentially advocate, and the Brewers' approach over the next few years becomes the model that many other teams hope to follow. I agree, but think that anyone who is only here another year or two are guys that should be traded. Lind was obvious, and I feel Lucroy should be dealt because (a) he could bring back a very big return, and (b) I don't think they should risk signing him to a long-term deal, so he's only here two years, and we probably won't be good during that time frame. A total rebuild would mean trading guys like Nelson, and no one is calling for that. Davis is only mentioned because we have depth at corner OF. Ditto Braun, with the addition of a lot more money going to him. I think overall the Brewer rebuild will be different than other teams' rebuilds, largely because we don't have any albatross contracts on the books, and we have a decent farm. Stearns is adding talent at all levels, and I have no doubt that once the time comes Attanasio will open the purse strings to add MLB talent. If he's going to model his franchise after anyone, I hope it's the Rays, but that's tough to do. As we saw this year, once a team comes out of the doldrums and starts playing well, the fans and media hound management to sell the farm to make a deadline deal. As to your first question, I think Lucroy should be traded this offseason, as one foul tip could end his career, and that's too much risk for a team in the Brewers' position to take. Of course you don't give him away, but if Stearns can get a big return for him, even if it's somewhat less than what he had hoped for, I think he should make the deal. I look at it this way... if he doesn't get traded and plays well, he may up his value a little, but not that much, as other GMs already know what type of player he is. The big change in value would come if and only if the market shifts (i.e. a playoff bound team loses their catcher to a career-threatening injury), and the potential upside (relative to what they'd get by trading him now) is probably another prospect thrown in, or a little better top-end guy in the deal. However, if he doesn't get traded and gets another concussion, his career could be over and the Brewers get nothing for him. Weighing risk vs. return, it seems like the smart move is to trade him.

I don't think it's wasted money this year, but Arcia is very likely going to be our SS in the not-too-distant future. I hope Segura plays well enough that he is tradeable at the deadline, when we then bring Arcia up. Otherwise, he will at some point be relegated to "utility" status, and next year he will make somewhere around $4-5MM, which will be far too much to pay a utility guy. The real question is whether the Brewers will be able to trade Segura for something or whether they will end up cutting him next offseason.

I think he will fill the spot at shortstop until they call up Arcia, at which point he will be a utility guy and potentially the RH part of a 2B platoon. He will then be let go, as his arby numbers will be too much for the Brewers to pay for a utility guy. He will then float around the league for a while as teams hope that he can live up to his potential.

Brewers' web site says they have agreed to one-year deals with all three eligible (Peralta, Smith and Segura). Smith is the only one with a dollar figure at this point.

At same time Gomez was not good last season and still helped bring back a good haul. That's the thing. I think most GMs look at more than one season to determine a player's value. Lucroy has been one of the best catchers in baseball, so I doubt a somewhat disappointing season last year will significantly reduce his value, especially when much of the disappointment can be attributed to injuries that in and of themselves shouldn't impact his future performance (i.e. he doesn't have a permanently balky back like Lind). Other GMs will, of course, use his 2015 offensive numbers to try to bargain for a cheaper price tag, but they (and Stearns) know that if they want a catcher Lucroy is the best choice available, and there isn't anyone else even close.

Actually if anything we overpaid. He was predicted to get $1.2mil. Agree. He's in his first year of arby, so while $1.475 isn't huge money in today's baseball world, it's quite a bit for a non-closing reliever.

Stearns is right to gamble that those will be answered in 2016 Much of the high hopes for a fairly rapid turnaround for the Brewers rests on getting a good return for Lucroy. Therefore, the "gamble" would be that the future of the organization rests on the chance a foul tip or a backswing catch Lucroy on the head. If I'm in the playoff hunt, I may be willing to that the concussion risk and stick with Lucroy. In the Brewers' situation, that's a huge risk to take.

With the reports coming that the Brewers are still actively talking on Lucroy I get the feeling a trade is coming before the season yet. That makes the most sense for the Brewers, as there is too much chance an injury could occur, and "team control" will get less as time passes. The upside of keeping him is minimal, but the downside (concussion knocking him out of baseball) is tremendous. Stearns is not going to give him away if there is no market, but I'd guess that he wants to make a deal before Spring Training.

I thought batting order "protection" didn't matter. Can of worms opened... I'm out of here :-)

I think that Stearns likes putting players in their "natural" position. He seems to love players who play multiple positions, but for most guys that's not the case, and he doesn't like putting these players all over the field (i.e. "he plays OF, so we could put him at any OF position, or at 1B"). Melvin seemed to try to find a defensive position for anyone who could hit, so this is going to be a different track than most of us are used to seeing. The team made clear that Santana was not going to be their everyday CF, and traded away the guy everyone expected to be our everyday 1B (Rogers) for Broxton. Since Phillips is the heir apparent at CF, trading for Broxton seems to show that Broxton will get every shot at being our primary CF this year, and wasn't picked up "for the future." Then, rather than just slotting a corner OF into 1B like many wanted, he signed a guy whose natural position is first base. This puts Santana in limbo, because if someone isn't traded, he is either a bench player or going back to AAA. He will get a shot at being an everyday corner OF. The question is when. Him getting a shot isn't worth making a bad trade and giving away Braun or Davis, so we may need to wait a while until the market heats up for corner OF before that trade is made.

Really? Davis is a proven big time power guy in the major leagues coming off a two month stretch where he blasted 20 HR. Santana is not and went 83 AB's in winter ball without a single HR. There are huge questions whether Santana can handle major league pitching. He's had some big numbers in the minors but after starting with a flourish right after the trade, he struggled. That was all addressed in the article. The author did a pretty good job of describing the strengths and weaknesses of both, and as the title implies, why it isn't an easy decision for Stearns to trade away Davis to make room for Santana, which seems to be the prevailing belief among fans and media, myself included.

As it sits right now, I believe it will be Davis, Broxton, Braun with Niewenheus and one of Flores/Reed/Peterson as the backups. In this scenario, Santana would go to AAA to be an everyday starter, called up either for injury replacement, or when someone is traded mid-season. I still think that one of Braun or Davis will be dealt this offseason. I think the Brewers would like that to be Braun, but that may not be an easy trade to make, so Davis is more likely to be the one dealt, opening up a corner OF spot for Santana. Note that this will only be if Stearns can find a trade that will bring back a lot of value for Davis, who is a valuable trade chip. The Brewers will not just give away Braun or Davis to open a spot for Santana.

That's well written. You get so used to acronyms and misspellings in social media, it's refreshing to see someone who actually cares about our language. I like this guy.

The reason you like to have a balanced lineup is because it's harder on the opposing pitcher to get into a rhythm. While there is merit to having a mix of lefties in the lineup, I'd far rather pitch to a lineup of Segura/Gennett/Segura/Gennett, etc. than a lineup consisting of eight Frank Thomases. The handedness matters, but the skill matters more. Also, while we have been a team full of swing for the fences guys, Stearns is making moves that hopefully show that isn't going to always be the case. Picking up Carter is a stop-gap move because we have nobody else to put there. We hope it works out, but it's no big deal if it doesn't. Other moves have shown Stearns to like versatile, good defense players with plate discipline... a far cry from Melvin's m.o. of finding a big bat and sticking it at a position where they didn't have a warm body. Apparently Stearns disagrees because they don't teach that course at Harvard. No, they only teach that at the School of Hard Knocks. Is the Harvard degree (as opposed to being a "baseball guy") your issue with Stearns, and the reason you have hated everything he's done? I would have thought you would have loved this pick-up, as it is done to improve this year's team, and appease the fans who buy tickets. Carter is probably similar to Davis, and you hate the thought of trading Davis. If we don't make any more moves, we have a middle of the order containing Lucroy, Braun, Davis and Carter. That should be well over 100 HR, which could actually help us win some games. They still could make more trades, but let's not gripe about what has not yet, and may not ever happen, assuming that it will be something you won't like. If anything, this move shows that Stearns isn't only looking 3-5 years down the road, and the rebuild really doesn't have a timetable. They could have stuck Middlebrooks at first, or moved an OF out of position to play first, opening a spot for Santana, but instead they chose to put an actual first baseman at first, even though it didn't fit the unrealistic mold of having a young, high-upside guy at every position. Believe me, I'd love to have a stud MLB ready prospect at every position, but since that isn't going to happen, I'm fine with picking up guys like Carter (and Cecchini, Broxton, etc) to see what they can do in an everyday role.

I wouldn't do that, no way, no how... Davis is far more valuable than a catcher with his ability. I think some of us are under-valuing Davis, hopefully, Stearns does not. Agree with turborickey. Davis has four years of cheap control of a good MLB player. Assuming Stearns trades him for minor leaguers, he should at least net one guy in the upper minors who has a good chance of being a decent MLB player, along with another "gem" or two in the lower minors. I can't see him being traded for a guy with limited time in pro ball that looks to top out as a good defense/no hit (probably backup) catcher. That sound like you'd be trading him for a guy who hopes to become as good as Martin Maldonado.

I would absolutely not deal Davis until Santana proves he can make enough contact against major league pitching Santana is definitely the reason Davis or Braun should be traded, but how is he supposed to prove anything against MLB pitching if he's sitting in AAA? I really don't want to see him sitting on the MLB bench getting sporadic playing time, which also wouldn't prove whether he could hit MLB pitching, as many players have trouble hitting when they don't get regular PAs. If the market for corner OF is down, then there is no need to force a trade, as Santana can start the year in AAA. However, at some point we will probably have to deal one (or both) of Davis/Braun and bring Santana up. There is of course risk involved when trading a MLB player and calling up a MiLB player, but has shown he can play in the majors, and the Brewers are in a position where that is a risk worth taking, assuming Stearns can bring back a lot of value in trade.