monty57

With Phelps we have signed the 3rd most players in the NL for the 6th highest total dollar amount... https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/free-agent-spending-by-team-national-league.html Stearns has done a lot, but fans being fans, they're always going to want more. I think we've been a bit spoiled by "big name" deals over the past two years, so this year has been a bit of a buzzkill for anyone wanting to see another "big name" deal. Stearns made some interesting deals early, but then did a bunch of "boring" moves. Hopefully a bunch of "boring" moves are better than one or two "exciting" ones. To this particular move, Phelps should be a solid-but-not-spectacular addition that should help the Brewers win games. For the "can we win in 2020" crowd, this should help us do that. One extra win could be the difference between making the playoffs or not. For the "don't hurt the future" crowd, other than $250k in 2021, this doesn't hurt our future at all. While "boring," I think that makes this small move a win-win.

The Cubs finally have a ruling on the Bryant grievance. I don't know why it took so long, but Bryant lost and the Cubs retain two years of "control." I bring this up because the Cubs are obviously trying to trim payroll. If they trade Bryant, their outlook is a lot different than if they have him, which in turn affects the Brewers' chances of winning the division.

I think Stearns tries to operate in a fashion where the team will continue to remain competitive year-after-year, never "going all in" for one year. I think that's why he passed on older guys who required four-year deals to sign, which may have helped this year, but likely would have made it more difficult to win down the road as a significant portion of our payroll would be spent on declining players. We have a fairly strong core of guys who are under contract for quite a few years. Stearns added a few more guys to that core in Urias, Lauer and Narvaez. The rest of the additions are guys who he hopes will help put us over the top this year, but won't hurt us long-term if they don't pan out. I remember a few years back when the big debate on this site was "window" vs "revolving core" strategies. I'm very excited with the way Stearns is building this franchise, so yes I do believe the Brewers can contend this year, and just as important is that they didn't do anything that should hurt their chances of continuing to contend for the foreseeable future. Narvaez is 28 and will probably make around $12M for the three years we have him. Grandal is 31 and will cost the White Sox $74M for the four years they have him. It's not too far-fetched to think that Narvaez could outperform Grandal over the next three years. We got Garcia for 2/$20M with a club option instead of paying 4/$64M with opt-outs and a player option in Castellanos. All things (i.e. defense) considered, I don't think Castellanos is that much better a player than Garcia. I view Lauer as a younger, left-handed version of Davies with more team control. Urias was a much more highly-tauted prospect than Grisham at a position of greater need. I would've liked a better option at 3B, and everyone would like a top-of-the rotation starter. I just think that Stearns didn't like the options at the price/years it would've taken, so he went the route he did. We still have a couple of weeks to swing an Arcia trade, but if Urias' injury is worse than hoped, we may be happy we're still holding onto Orlando. All-in-all, I'm pleased with the way Stearns is operating, and I'm looking forward to seeing how the team looks.

Per Cot's, this would put the Reds opening day payroll over $140M. 2019 was a record opening day payroll of $126.6, and before that, they were generally in the $90's or low $100's. After this season, Bauer ($17.5), DeSclafani ($5.975) and Galvis ($5.5) become free agents, while potentially eight players hit arby for the first time. They have four players currently in arby who would get raises. Don't know much else about their finances, or how much they can afford, but Cincinnati is around twice the size of Milwaukee. I'd have to think that their spending is about done. It would seem that the Brewers, who are around $96M right now, should still be able to add another $10-15M just to get back to the $110M or so they've been around. I'd guess that it's been the extra years on older players that has hampered the Brewers' spending more than the inability to add more payroll.

Ideally, I'd like to see Burnes and Peralta both stretched out in AAA, as I would like to see both of them get a fair shot at starting before making the permanent move to the pen. Burnes just needs to straighten things out in his head. I think he lost confidence after getting shelled (common among rookies), and he should have been sent to AAA earlier. He has at least as much upside as Woodruff if he can put it together. Peralta probably doesn't have as much upside, and his future may be in the pen if he can't get another average/above-average pitch, but I'd like to see him get the shot, as he's young and could be a solid rotation arm for us for years. Unfortunately, I think Peralta (and maybe Burnes) is going to fall into the same situation Hader was in, where the team first says "we're shooting for the playoffs, so even though his future is as a starter, we need him in the pen to get us through the season," which then turns to "we still think he could be an effective starter, but he's too important to us in the pen," which leads to "look how good he is in the pen... he probably wouldn't have been a good starter anyhow." Then a quick peek at trade values and contracts shows that a good starting pitcher is far more valuable than a good reliever, and we all complain about how we can never develop good starting pitching of our own, and it's too expensive to buy in free agency.

If I read it right, the restrictions are on hitters pitching, not on pitchers hitting or playing the field. Because they put in one rule, they probably figured they had to add the other so that teams didn't just list everyone as a pitcher so they could come in and pitch if they wanted. Don't worry, whatever problems this causes will just be solved by adding another rule or two next offseason. I guess I don't see a problem with the very rare occurrence of a position player pitching an inning. I think fans actually enjoy this when it does occur. Therefore, the best course of action would have seemed to have been to simply leave it alone, but that doesn't appear to be Manfred's way.

That's pretty much the world we live in, regardless of the industry. Many people seem to think that any perceived problem is best solved by an official making more rules and regulations, rather than just letting things sort themselves out. Generally, the rules and regulations don't solve the perceived problem, and just create more problems through the "unintended consequences" Joseph mentioned. I agree with the final sentiment. Baseball is offense vs defense. Manfred wants to give more and more benefit to offense to make the game "exciting," but I think many fans enjoy a well-pitched game as much as they enjoy a slug-fest. If every game becomes a slug-fest, fans will stop tuning in. I think this is akin to the NFL changing it's rules a few years back, making it more difficult to defend against the passing game. NFL ratings steadily declined. This year they noticeably started calling more offensive interference and less defensive penalties, and it seems (we'll see how if final ratings prove this true) that the NFL is re-gaining its popularity. People like the game, not one aspect of the game. I hope Manfred realizes this before he goes too far.

This could be meaningful, because Morin looks like a decent middle reliever, but the kind of guy you would like to be able to shuffle back-and-forth to the minors when the bullpen needs a fresh arm. Good depth signing on a minor league deal.

Yeah, two years ago the Cards went for big bats while disregarding defense, and it was a clown show. They cleaned up their defense in 2019 (for example starting Fowler in RF and putting Martinez on the bench) and they won the division. One thing that concerns me about the 2020 Brewers is that we'll have poor defense at multiple positions (Narvaez, Hiura, Braun at 1B). Match this up with some groundball pitchers, and I hope this doesn't cost us too many wins.

At least not any lateral moves. If they felt they could get a substantial upgrade they may pull the trigger, but they probably feel they'll get average MLB production from what they have, so any move would have to be for a "needle mover." But I think you're right. I expect future moves to focus on pitching.

Could be a high-end guy who we'd get for a discount due to injury/performance issues in 2019. Might be a really good pick-up for the Brewers. The Brewers seem to be counting on a lot of "bounce back candidates" bouncing back this coming season... Stearns seems to be building a core of longer-term players and filling in the rest of the team with short-term guys who have proven to be MLB players who he can get for a reasonable price on a short-term deal. Add long-term pieces when you can (Urias, Narvaez) to add to the core, and don't get tied up in long-term deals with guys who aren't part of the core. Strop could very well be a guy who had some injury issues last year and wants a one-year "build up your value" contract so he can get a long-term deal next offseason. Like Moose and Grandal, I'd be happy if we can get guys for a discount for one-year and see them sign a monster deal next year because they performed well. As long as we keep a solid core in place, I like taking the risk on guys like Strop.

With his throwing style, he's quite a bit worse against lefties than righties. I wonder if he's going to be someone who's hurt by the "three batter minimum" rule.

Will Harris, who previously pitched for the Astros. From MLBtraderumors: While Harris’ age is a natural question mark, he has a pretty clean injury history, with only two IL stints (totaling around six weeks in 2017 due to shoulder inflammation) over his nine MLB seasons. In that time, he has quietly posted some outstanding numbers, particularly as a member of Houston’s bullpen from 2015-19. Harris has a 2.36 ERA, 4.38 K/BB rate, and 9.5 K/9 over 297 innings, averaging 59 frames per season.

I think you're right on the online streaming thing. Also, when Disney bought Fox, they were forced by the anti-trust gods of government to sell the regional Fox Sports channels. I believe that MLB at least considered buying them, but they ended up being sold to Sinclair Broadcast Group in May 2019 for $10.6 billion. I don't have any idea how this will affect negotiations/prices for the Brewers, but they will be negotiating with a different group than the one who signed the last deal.

I don't necessarily agree with the final sentence, as I think that starters are significantly more valuable than relievers, so while Hader is an "ace reliever," he's not as valuable as he would be if he were an "ace starter." BTV has Hader at 48.3, while Walker Buehler (4 years service time left) is at 112.4. While valuable, Hader's value is not nearly as high as it would be if he were a starting pitcher (the guys getting the $20-30M AAV contracts). I'm not eager to trade him, but his value is as high as it will ever be unless they decide to turn him into a starter and he continues to pitch well. Therefore, depending on the return it may be worth trading him while his value is this high. Since this is the third base thread, to keep this on topic, Hader is one trade chip they have that could net them a really good, young third baseman if one is available (thanks to wallus and JosephC for your responses... doesn't look like McNeil is going to be the guy). Hader was certainly in discussions during the Winter Meetings, so the reason he's still a Brewer is probably that the good, young player with lots of team control probably wasn't available in trade. Whether or not Hader is off the block, doesn't change the fact that they could use a third baseman. The question is whether they get him through free agency, by picking up a big salary dump, or by trading someone. Donaldson (Steamer projection 4.7 WAR) is probably out of the Brewers' price range. If so, then I don't think I'd want Seager (Steamer projection 2.4 WAR), who would cost $19.5M, $18.5M, $15M over the next three years unless Seattle is eating most of the Seager contract. Therefore, the thoughts of the Brewers paying most of the Seager contract in order to get a good prospect are probably not happening. But, he's still projected to post a 2.4 WAR, so if Seattle eats enough of the contract and we get him "for free" by simply eating some of the contract, he's better than a lot of the other options. As to who might be available in trade. Someone earlier brought up Ramirez from Cleveland, with a Steamer projection of 5.2 WAR. BTV has his value at 96.1, so roughly double Hader's value. I highly doubt the Brewers are giving up something like Hader, Turang, Lutz, Burnes for Ramirez, so he's probably out of the question. Bryant (4.8 WAR projection) is on the block, but we're probably not trading with the Cubs. Justin Turner (3.8 WAR projection) has been mentioned, and is owed 1 year / $20M, putting his BTV value at 5.3, so he is a definite potential target if the Dodgers do trade him. Even if they do put him on the block, and we pay all of his $20M, we'd still have to give up someone like Small, which would be tough for the Brewers to swallow for one year of Turner. Other options would be a cheaper FA, like Cabrera (1.6 WAR Steamer projection) or Frazier (1.5 WAR projection). To those looking at Castellanos, Steamer has him at a projected 1.5 WAR as a 3B with -16.5 defense. For 2020, him vs Cabrera or Frazier is probably dependent on how much you prefer hitting over fielding, the net "WAR value" is projected to be around the same, but Castellanos would cost a lot more. Sogard is projected at 0.8 WAR, so depending on how much Stearns' projections are in line with Steamer, it may not be worth it to spend the money it would take to bring in Cabrera, Frazier or Castellanos (as a 3B) for the marginal upgrade they would bring over Sogard unless they don't cost much more than we paid for Sogard. Castellanos is obviously getting a lot more than the others, and as an OF has been worth 3.0 & 2.8 WAR the past two seasons, so they could jerry-rig a plan of starting him at 3B and moving him to OF mid-game, but they already have a lot of OF, so there would be a lot of moving parts, and to me it doesn't seem like it'd be worth the contract he's likely to get. I don't really know what my choice would be. Even if we could get Seatlle to eat a lot of the contract, Seager is going to be 32-34 years old through his contract, and most of the guys we could trade for would cost way more than I'd like to give up. In a year like this, without a really good option, then someone like Cabrera or Frazier on a one-year deal may make the most sense, giving us a full-time 3B and moving Sogard to a utility role. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Was there anything behind a Mets/Jeff McNeil trade, or was that just pure speculation by a poster or two on this board? If we could get McNeil as the centerpiece for Hader, I'd be for that. He looks like a potential stud at 3B, who doesn't hit arbitration until 2022.

Can't get here fast enough. If you have a system that can be 100% accurate, why continue to accept a system that is far less than 100% accurate? To the greatest extent possible, the outcome of games should be determined by the players, not the umpires.

This is the thing. I'd say that most big money contracts that are signed, and certainly most long-term, big money contracts that have been signed with players over 30 since the "steroid era" have ended with teams wishing they could get out of the contracts. That teams like the Red Sox and Cubs are trying to trade away their MVP-caliber players in order to shed payroll should be a warning to everyone to be careful. But, like lambs to the slaughter, as soon as one bad contract is off the books, teams (and fans) will gleefully walk right into the next one. This offseason, the Cubs are trying to trade Bryant because they can't afford him and the bad/untradeable contracts they have. Therefore, if they trade him, they will be left with the bad, untradeable players and not have Bryant. Signing the bad contracts has put them in the situation where they will probably be a "second tier" team. As a Brewer fan, I like seeing the Cubs in that situation, but I realize that if it can happen to a big money team, that problem would be much worse if the Brewers signed a few bad contracts. It's no fun to buy matching Toyota Corollas for you and your wife when your neighbor buys the Ferrari, but your happy for your decision when you get 150,000 relatively uneventful miles out of your Corollas while the neighbor's Ferrari is repossessed because he can't make the payments.

I would have liked Ryu, but four years is just too risky with his injury history. The Brewers cannot afford to have $20M in dead money for a season or two. I'd take Ryu on a year or two, but if we're going four years on someone, they need to be younger and/or more durable. Like it or not, the financial structure of baseball is what it is. We need to pay 26 guys on the MLB roster, so paying one of them $20M means we have a lot less for the other 25 guys. Therefore, that one player had better be a "sure thing" to stay relatively injury-free while playing at a high level for the duration of the contract. There is certainly reason to believe that a 35/36 year old Ryu will not be injury-free or playing at a high level.

With the way the Brewers use starters, it's hard to rack up innings. In 2019, Davies led the team with 159.2 IP. Chase Anderson had 139, Woodruff 121.2, Houser 111.1, and everyone else was under 100 IP. Granted, there were injuries and under-performance issues leading to those totals, but I doubt he hits 175 IP. If he does, it's probably well worth the bonuses he'll receive.

With the way the Brewers use starters, it's hard to rack up innings. In 2019, Davies led the team with 159.2 IP. Chase Anderson had 139, Woodruff 121.2, Houser 111.1, and everyone else was under 100 IP. Granted, there were injuries and under-performance issues leading to those totals, but I doubt he hits 175 IP. If he does, it's probably well worth the bonuses he'll receive.

Don't know if we have the resources to land Donaldson, but his AAV may come down a bit for any team willing to go the 4th year with him. Of course, that would mean that we'd be paying him a lot of money in four years when he's probably not going to be all that productive.

Kind of hard to compare what Smoak does vs what Thames does, since Thames is a strict platoon player and Smoak is not. Thames requires another player on the roster, while Smoak does not, and Thames "average" numbers look far better because he was only used against RHP than they would if he played everyday. Smoak is projected to be a 1.2-1.3 WAR player, which pretty much equals what we got at 1B last year (Thames/Aguilar) for less money. As the previously referenced Twitter post mentioned, our offense will be different, but we have (at least in theory) made up for what we lost in production from last season offensively, and that's without an everyday third baseman. I believe we will find an everyday 3B, and whatever "projected positive WAR" he brings to the table theoretically should be the "projected positive WAR" our offense will provide over last year's end results. Projections are educated guesses, and anything can happen, but "on paper" I think Stearns is doing a good job of replacing what we lost for significantly less than what the players we lost are getting in free agency.

The only reason we had Moose and Grandal was that there was a weak FA market last year and they wanted to sign a one-year deal to try again this year. The deals were structured into two-year deals simply to defer a few million from last year's payroll to this year, since those signings put us way over budget. Attanasio has shown that he will spend over budget in special circumstances, and getting those two deals last year qualified. Therefore, it should have been expected that the team would cut back somewhat from last season's team record payroll. Throw in that we still have to pay a few million this year for the production Moose and Grandal gave us last year, and that hampers our spending even further. Finally, since Moose and Grandal only signed here for the one-year deal, no one should have expected that the Brewers would sign them to multi-year deals. That was obviously never the plan, or they simply would have signed them to multi-year deals last year when the price was better. To the point of making up for what we lost, we should get similar offensive numbers at catcher, should get better offensive numbers at SS, and depending on how we use Garcia/Braun, we could make up for our 1B production, especially considering that Aguilar put up pretty bad numbers for us last year before being traded. Moose's numbers were split between 2B and 3B, so a full season of Huira should help make up for that loss, while our 3B numbers were split between Shaw and Moose, making it an easier hurdle to get over than simply trying to replace Moose. Pitching will be interesting, as we lost Chase, Davies and Lyles, but hopefully won't have the horrendous results we got from Peralta, Burns and Chacin as starters. There are questions in the rotation, but like Lyles, Miley and others, Lauer, Brett Anderson and Lindblom all seem like the type of guys Stearns sees something in and they turn out good. Stearns has been active, and the holes left to fill seem to be 3B, some pitching help and probably a LH hitter who can play 1B. I can't see a scenario where our opening day 3B is currently with the team, so we will add someone there, and there's still some glimmer of hope that we could sign a Ryu or Dallas with our remaining cash. I'm not expecting the latter, but I fully expect to log on one day and see that Stearns has acquired a third baseman that will make us better. I'm really excited about this team. The only reason I could see someone being truly upset is if they really thought that we could beat out all of the big markets for the top named guys. By the way, part of the reason the last few years' free agent classes had it tough was that some of the big markets were trying to shed payroll after they made the penalties tougher. They obviously got past that, so going forward the luxury tax threshold will help the Brewers, but they probably won't have years like the last two where they had excess payroll room after a short rebuild and most of the big markets were trying to shed salary.

It is $10mil not $35mil. It fills a need too. Now the cripple trio of Braun/Cain/Garcia can cover part of the OF and Braun can be the RH portion of a platoon at 1B. I don't think they are hoping for him to be more than an .800 OPS, but this isn't shelling out much money or commitment. Actually its $19.5 million and they cut and re-signed Claudio to save peanuts. Which seems to show that Stearns has a value for every player and will not exceed the value he believes that player to be worth. He's human and can be wrong, but he obviously believes that Garcia is worth the money he's paying him. Someone earlier in the thread linked to an article that rated him and he seems to be a pretty good all-around player. Good speed, decent defense, great arm, decent contact, decent power.