monty57

A hit gets you on base. Batting average is the biggest part of OBP. Walk rate is important, batting average is important. How do you come up with the “important” stats without the “unimportant” batting average?

My original post on it was paralleling it with what another poster had said San Diego's owners had done. If they bought up the surrounding buildings, then they receive the revenue from all of the area bars and restaurants. You said you'd rather drink your own cheap beer. That's understandable, but it does nothing for the team. The owners would rather have you drink their expensive beer, so if they own the bar next door they will get your money before and after the game in addition to getting your money while you are in the stadium. The goal of their business is to get as much of your money as they can, not to give you the cheapest experience possible. If this is one of the reasons that San Diego is able to sustain a higher payroll, then maybe that strategy could have been a more effective one for the Brewers'. It's a moot point now, as that happened over 20 years ago, but it certainly could have made more sense for the Brewers to go in the other direction.

That's like saying addition doesn't have much meaning because there are more complex mathematical equations. Without addition, you can't do the more complex equations. Getting a hit is the most fundamental part of baseball. Batting average is very important, as it is the base from which all other statistical data can be formed. It is not all-encompassing, and there are other things that are more inclusive, but that does not mean that batting average isn't important.

Agree. I keep looking at that big wall of free agents that are all hitting at the same time (Burnes, Woodruff, Adames, Houser, Lauer) and putting together "what are we going to do" scenarios. I think that trading Hader while picking up Bush gives the Brewers the option of keeping most of those guys together for one more year if they think that's the best option. They'll even have a little extra money to fill in some holes, as some cheap young players can take over and we won't have to spend big on those positions. However they play it, you're right that fans who get attached to the names on the back of the jersey are going to wonder what's going on when we're trading away our stars over the next few seasons.

It was Doug Melvin who made that comment about pitching getting more at the deadline and hitting getting more in the offseason. We can choose to believe of disbelieve it, it's just what he said. I think that this year with the bats we have to think in relative terms. We have "around league average" at every position. It's easier to improve from below average to average or slightly above average than it is to go from slightly above average to good. Getting a good player is expensive. I think that some of our prospects were probably on the "untouchable" list for Stearns, and I think that in a few years we will be very happy for that. We still had some good "trade bait" available, but not nearly enough for someone like Soto, and since Bell was included in that trade, he was probably off limits as well. That really limited the market on who we could have traded for that would have been a significant improvement over what we currently have. As to trading Hader, the team getting him would obviously be "going for it" as well, so it's unlikely they would have given up a good MLB hitter in return. The net result is that we ended up with a bullpen this year that is probably around the same strength as it was when we had Hader, while picking up some prospects who I think Stearns really likes, even if they aren't "on the charts" so we "casual fans" don't know much about them. Our bullpen will be weaker next year without Hader, so hopefully Williams will settle into the closer role and Bush can help maintain the bullpen as an overall strength for the team. The "economics of baseball" stink, but we needed the $15M or so in payroll relief we got by trading Hader, and hopefully that will allow Stearns & Co. to strengthen some of the holes in the roster. Add in that some of the guys we didn't trade away, like Turang, Ashby, and our young OFs can step in for league minimum and help the team out, and I think what we did should help maintain the "continued competitiveness" that Attanasio has preached since bringing Stearns on board. Our chance to win it all this year probably dropped slightly, when fans want to see it improve. Our chance to continue to put out winning baseball teams into the future probably went up, which fans don't really think about right now, but will be very happy for when cheering for future Brewer teams.

I've stepped back from this for a few days now to let emotions subside. I've been fairly positive on it because I think that over the long-haul the Brewers will easily win this trade based on the "WAR given up vs WAR received" argument. I think that Stearns really likes Gasser and Ruiz and wanted them in the system, and he feels that Rogers is a nice guy to keep the 'pen a strength for the remainder of this season. Rogers' 2022 WAR isn't going to be that far off from Hader's, and if they are indeed part of the Brewers' future plans, Gasser and Ruiz should easily provide more WAR for the Brewers over their combined tenures than Hader will accrue in one season. I understand that my outlook of looking at the long-term in everything is not how most people look at things, and I understand why many fans have a negative impression of this trade. I do think that 10 years from now, we'll look back on this and say that we did well in the trade.

Yeah, since this only goes to 2010, it just captures Melvin’s “all in” years, so he looks bad on this chart. Stearns’ philosophy of always wanting team control back in any bigger trade should assure that he doesn’t get “fleeced” in a trade. Even a role player should give you some value over 5-6 years.

Not surprisingly, our best trade was acquiring Yelich for a bunch of guys who combined for negative WAR. Our worst two trades were when the Brewers wanted to "go all in" for Fielder's last year in 2011 by trading away the farm to acquire Grienke and Marcum.

I posted this image in another thread, but I thought it would make for good discussion in it's own thread. It was put together by a Reddit user who is doing this for each team. It shows the WAR-based value given up and received in each trade since 2010, ranked from best (Brewers received the most net WAR) to worst (Brewers gave up the most net WAR).

Here is the one for the Brewers:

1) The Brewers have a few first year arby guys on their roster. Burnes is at $6.5M, Adames $4.6M, Urias $2.55M, House & Lauer $2.425M each, Tellez $1.94M, and Gustave $700k. Gott ($725k), Bush ($825k), Caratini ($2M), and Woodruff ($6.8M) are in year 2 arby. Tellez is a comp, but he's an everyday player, while the guys under $1M are relievers. Since Hiura has had sporadic play and been bounced between MLB & the minors, I just used $1.25M as an estimate. You may be right that he gets more, but "the panel" may see him as a bench guy and think he's not worth that much. 2) My guess on why the Brewers have done what they've done is in large part that they signed McCutchen to an $8.5M deal, so they wanted him to play everyday. Since neither Hiura nor McCutchen should see much time in the field, Hiura was the odd man out. He's sucked the past few years, so they probably didn't think it would be an issue, so his success (whether sustainable or not) kind of put them in a weird situation. The best way for them to give him PAs was to sit their "big" offseason FA signee. 3) I agree that he won't be an MLB player for long if his success proves to be a fluke. He was obviously a sub-par player in 2020 & 2021 and that puts him on a short leash, but he's hit all his life before that and has hit to start this year after changing his mechanics, so I just hope that the Brewers give him the chance in what's left of this year (not last year or 2020) to see if he can prove himself. If so, he has a future with the team. If not, then send him packing. I don't care if McCutchen sits the bench, as he's not that good anymore and he has no future with the team.

I figured around $1.25M in my spreadsheet, but I just rounded in the post because I didn't think it was all that meaningful. He's not going to be overly-expensive if they plan on using him, but he will be overly expensive if they plan on sitting him on the bench. In fact, I don't really see him as a good bench player because of his poor defense. They need to decide if he's a good enough hitter to DH, because if he's not, then he's not going to be an asset to the team. I don't know why you say "nonsense" other than to degrade other posters. His starts prior to being sent down were almost exclusively against LHP, when he wasn't hitting LHP, but he was hitting well against RHP. Even though McCutcheon hadn't hit well against RHP since 2019, he got cemented into the DH role, including getting every start against RHP. I don't like strikeouts either, but Hiura's also walking at over a 10% clip, and he's barreling up balls when he makes contact. He is doing some things well after making his adjustments this past offseason, so I don't get the laser-like fixation on K rate, as if that is the only thing that matters. I'd like to see it brought down, and I think there is a good chance it will come down if he gets regular PAs vs RHP rather than getting most PAs against LHP, and only facing RHP when the high-K relievers into the game. This tidbit is from MLB's own site: "K/9 rate tells us a lot, but it's important to note the difference between starters and relievers within the statistic. Because relievers generally pitch for such a short period of time and aren't as concerned about conserving pitches, they can throw with higher intensity for each batter. As a result, relief-pitcher K/9 numbers are generally higher than those of starting pitchers." That seems to be pretty obvious, but it doesn't seem to be recognized in this thread. The amazing thing to me is that while put in a position to lose, Hiura has still been able to put up such good numbers against these hard-throwing RH relievers. Yes, the HR rate is unsustainably high, but so is the K rate. Give him some time, and he may just prove to be a decent MLB hitter... at least against right-handed pitching. If he can prove that, he will not only help this year's team, which seems to be in need of some help right now, but he will show that he can help them in the future. The upside is really good, while the downside is that past-his-prime McCutcheon will lose some PAs before leaving this offseason. Really, what's the harm?

Since this is a Hiura thread, I'll relate this to him. McCutcheon is on a one-year deal, so he's gone after the season. He certainly isn't hitting like someone who needs to be in the lineup every day. These two factors lead me to believe that McCutcheon is a prime candidate to lose some PAs going forward. The "unsustainable" Hiura is continuing to sustain, even with limited playing time and a trip to AAA. At some point, he needs to start eating into other players' PAs. DH is the best place for Hiura, but his ability to play (to some degree) 1B, 2B and LF should allow Counsell to find some regular PAs for Hiura to see what he can do. I was one of his biggest proponents early in the year, got frustrated at his lack of PT and figured the Brewers had given up on him, but since he didn't get traded and is still here, let him play. He could help out this year, and he can also prove one way or the other whether he is worth offering arby and paying him a little more to be on the roster next year. To the thoughts about Renfroe, having him and Hiura on the roster next year could save the team from having to go out and sign "another McCutcheon" next year. Renfroe would be the normal RF, but he could play some DH as we have plenty of other OFs. Hiura would be the normal DH, but could get PAs around the field when other players need a "day off" at DH. I doubt the Brewers will go into the season with two rookie starting OFs, and I think we'll start a rookie in CF, so Renfroe is a nice "transition" player who can be the starter in RF until and unless someone else forces him out. Then, one of our current prospects will be the RF starter in 2024. Of course, if someone wants to really pay up in trade for Renfroe this offseason, I'd be fine with that. I just don't think that we'd just DFA him to save money. With Hader gone, Wong likely to be gone, and Turang and one of the CFs likely to be ready, we should have a some extra payroll room even with Renfroe on the roster. Even moreso if Hiura can be our DH for around $1M.

I think Nashville will be getting a team in the near future. Thankfully, it'll be the A's or Rays and not the Brewers.

I'm not against re-signing Peterson, it just depends on what teams are offering him. He's 32 and is having a career year, posting a 2.0 WAR (Fangraphs) with some season left to go. His previous high was 1.1 WAR all the way back in 2016. He should do everything he can to cash in on what could be his final MLB contract. If the price is right, I wouldn't be against it, but he could very easily revert back to the near replacement-level player he's been most of his career so I wouldn't pay too much. My guess is that some other team is going to offer him more than the Brewers, but I wouldn't be upset if he's back. As to Turang, I know they've used him in CF, and he's a good defender so I'm sure he could play there. My concern is that we have a lot of OF prospects and few infield prospects, so I'd be hesitant to move a slick-fielding middle infielder to OF, when we have four near-MLB ready OFs in Nashville right now, three of whom play CF. For '23, I'd go with an infield of Turang, Urias and Adames, with Brosseau as a utitiy IF who starts mainly when a lefty is on the mound. Rating defense, it's probably Turang, Adames, Urias, Brosseau best to worst, but they probably won't move the veteran for the rookie, so Adames will probably stay at SS. Since Urias plays 3B and Turang hasn't, I'd stick with Urias at 3B, with Turang at 2B. Looking at splits, none of Adames, Urias or Turang need a platoon partner, with the caveat that Turang is still only a prospect. To the topic of "Bring Turang up," my biggest concerns are (1) there isn't an easy answer for who we should jettison, and (2) he would probably spend most of his time on the bench in which case he'd be better off playing every day in Nashville. I'm very excited that some of our position playing prospects are getting ready for the show. I just want to make sure that when they get here they will play. I don't want to see them come up and ride the pine.

If they put together a winning business model that allows them to compete with bigger markets while operating in a smaller market, then I applaud them. A lot of Brewer fans wanted Miller Park built downtown, but Selig used his political influence to keep the stadium where it is so he could get the parking revenue. Looks like the San Diego plan may have been better. We'll see what the future holds. I expected that they would have to blow things up, but if they really invested in the business to the degree you're saying, they could have built income streams that will allow them to be more competitive long-term.

Defensively, Urias has been pretty bad at 3B this year, but he had positive value the past two seasons, so hopefully things can even out. Offensively, he has a 105 wRC+ vs LHP, and a 101 vs RHP, so he hasn't shown that he needs to be platooned. He's only 25 and still under team control for a long time, so I don't think I'd want to transition him to a "super utility" guy or a platoon/bench guy. He's too important for the Brewers' future. Let's just hope he works through the defensive issues, which I think he can. Peterson has been a nice player for the Brewers this year, but he's a free agent this offseason and his play should merit a multi-year deal. With the Brewers' arby raises and payroll constraints, I think that will probably be elsewhere, so when he gets healthy I'd keep him in the role he's played so well this year.

Offensively, Wong is fine if they'd stop using him against lefties. Defensively, I don't know what happened, but he went from "best 2B glove in the game" to negative defensive value. As to Adames and Urias, the "eye test" would say that they should stop swinging for the fences on every single pitch. The extra handful of HR they hit isn't worth all the OBP they're sacrificing. But, I think that's a losing battle, because everyone's swinging for the fences these days, and that's what people seem to be handing out big contracts for. If Turang doesn't change his approach, his bat-to-ball skills will be a welcome addition when he finally arrives.

Kolton Wong vs RHP (263 PA) .287 / .361 / .500 / .861 wRC+ 137 vs LHP (68 PA) .138 / .254 / .138 / .392 wrc+ 21 Mike Brosseau vs RHP (47 PA) .220 / .319 / .366 / .685 wRC+ 96 vs LHP (70 PA) .317 / .386 / .524 / .910 wRC+ 154 There is no way Brosseau should be sent down. Instead, he should be in a strict platoon with Wong at 2B. While he's not a great defensive player overall, 2B is the one position where he has a positive UZR/150. We really need help against LHP, so I would not want to send down one of the few guys on the team who is actually hitting well against lefties. I like Turang, and think he will be the starting 2B next year, but since he doesn't play 3B, I think we should probably wait to bring him up when we know he'll get regular playing time. If the thought is to replace Davis, then why not just bring up one of Ruiz / Frelick / Mitchell who are actually CFs? Maybe it's just recency bias, but I'd really like to see what Ruiz can do, and he's already on the 40-man. The "problem" is that Taylor and Davis have both provided positive WAR this year. They're not great, but they're not horrible, so Stearns has to be pretty sure that the guy he's bringing up will be good, or else you're not really improving.

Yelich is owed $26M per year through 2028, with a $20M option ($6.5M buyout) in 2029. The Brewers are obligated to pay this. Revocable waivers went away when they changed the trade rules. If they waive him, it would be irrevocable, so if no one claimed him, he would be a free agent and the Brewers would still have to pay him his entire contract while he was playing elsewhere. This is not going to happen.

Yeah, teams might get a bit upset if one of their scouts made their reports public.

I probably went a bit too far on the "Stearns guy" vs "Melvin guy" stuff. I kind of drifted off from my original point, which is that while Gasser and Kelly have similar stats in some regards, Gasser's K:BB ratio is about twice that of Kelly, and that's pretty important. They both strike guys out, but Kelly walks too many. That, along with the need to add Kelly to the 40-man roster or risk losing him makes it understandable why they would trade for Gasser while trading away Kelly. I am in no way calling Kelly a bad prospect. To the contrary, he had to be good enough to get 2.5 years of Bush, who was pitching well this year. I wish the best for Kelly in the future, but I sure hope Bush makes the trade worthwhile for the Brewers.

Narvaez was the one in the trade rumors. If they had traded him, Severino could've been the backup with Feliciano getting reps in the minors, then bring Feliciano up in time to be on the playoff roster. Of course with full Murphy's Law in effect, the day after the cut him, they need him.

He could, but if they didn't do it when McCutchen was in a month-long slump earlier in the year, I don't think it's likely they will do it now. I think he'll get some starts in a "super utility" role in LF, 1B, 2B and DH. I just hope they give him additional starts against RHP, and don't try to force the "square peg into a round hole" by starting him mainly against lefties.

I don't hate the Padres over it, but I hate the strategy. Not that long ago, they had a once-in-a-generation-talent rookie (Tatis) signed to a long-term deal and easily the #1 farm in baseball. They could have been a perennial contender for years and years. Instead, they traded away most/all of the talent from the farm and signed multiple FAs to long-term deals, pushing payroll beyond the luxury tax (which makes me question the "small market" moniker), all to try to win in a three-year window. They screwed the pooch in year one, so they're now doubling down in year two, and they're still not likely to do better than the #1 or 2 Wild Card spot. They'll lose Wil Myers, Josh Bell, Sean Manaea, Mike Clevinger, Nomar Mazara and others after this year, and Darvish, Hader, Pomeranz and others after next year. Then they'll look like the Angels, with a few high-paid stars surrounded by replacement level players, trying to decide if they should trade Soto or see if they can find enough money in Southern California to get him to sign an extension. If I were a Padres fan, I wouldn't like what they're doing, and I think that with all the star power and media delight they're generating, it's going to blow up on them. I would have far preferred watchin a decade of home-grown stars getting in the playoffs year-in and year-out. But then again, I like the "continually competitive" strategy over the "go all in and then rebuild" cycle.