monty57

I think, or at least hope, that it means we should stop looking at things in the light of "this means we're trying to compete from {enter beginning year} to {enter ending year}," and start looking at trying to build a team that will attempt to remain competitive year-in and year-out. The Marlins situation gave several teams (including the Brewers) a chance to acquire one of the league's premiere players, so they took that chance. That left them with enough money for one big free agent signing and several smaller, hole-patching contracts. Chacin is more of a hole-patch deal than a team-changing deal. The team-changing deal was between signing Cain or one of the "big four" starting pitchers. They chose Cain. I'd love to have more starting pitching, but I realize that we're still in the early stages of turning this franchise from one that occasionally tries to get a one-year playoff shot to one that looks more like the Cardinals. That's a long-term goal. We seem to be a little ahead of where most people expected us to be, and we have some long-term answers at multiple positions along with a strong farm that will continue to add talent to the MLB roster. But we're still not "there" yet. While I would really like to see us beat out the Cubs this year, our realistic expectations were to be in the hunt for one of the Wild Card spots this season. Eleven games into the season, I don't think that expectation has changed.

I doubt the Brewers have any internal definition of "a #3" or "a #5" pitcher. They signed Chacin to be... Chacin. Agree. The "number" of a pitcher doesn't matter. They signed him to a 2-year deal at $7.5M / year. That's around what teams were paying for non-closing relievers this offseason. He was signed to be a guy who can toe the mound every five days and hopefully give the team a chance to win most of the games he starts. Right now, he could probably be considered our third-best starter on the MLB roster. By mid-way through next year, I hope he'll be fighting to hold on to the fifth spot in the rotation as some of our young starters pass him on the depth chart.

Not signing Walker (or anyone else) seems to show that the Brewers are going to see if Villar can bounce back. They may give up on this project at some point, but it's going to be months, not days of poor performance. I was at last night's game, and he looked better, so I'm hoping he puts things together and has a good year. Stearns has said that we are going to have to rely on contributions from "young" guys in order to remain competitive. The ideal situation for the Brewers would be for Villar to become a valuable player who mans second until Hiura is ready (however long that takes), and can then be traded for something when Hiura replaces him.

This season should be fun! The offense should be far less streaky than it has been in a long time, and "on paper" we look to be one of the top 5-6 teams in the NL, so we can go into the season with realistic hopes of making the playoffs. We have quality veterans playing alongside young players, with a still-strong farm ready to add more talent as needed. This could be the first in a long string of Brewer playoff appearances. Let the games begin.

Very few teams have enough quality to justify sitting a star 10% of the time if he's healthy. The extra 5-10 starts by the star, even if he's tired, are likely going to be better than what the backup would provide. Generally, if the backup is good enough to justify sitting the star, then that backup should be starting somewhere and you're wasting his talent as a bench player. The only reason we have that quality in the OF is because the market for OF dried up, so our quality backup means we'll have to have less-than-stellar production elsewhere. I'd be fine with Yelich playing an extra 5-10 games, even if he's a little tired, if it meant we traded for an upgrade at SP, allowing that SP to get 30 starts with Suter playing a valuable role as "swingman." The relative increase in production at SP should far outwiegh any benefit received by sitting Yelich on the bench 5-10 extra days for rest. But that trade didn't happen. I'm far too excited about the start of the season (odd roster and all) to continue to dwell on this. I am going to cheer for Woodruff and Suter to succeed. They may be question marks, but their success would greatly help the Brewers now and into the future. It's time to put the offseason in the past and watch the Brewers as they hopefully make the next step into the playoffs in 2018.

The thought behind trading Santana was that we would get an upgrade at another position, notably starting pitching. One of those LF could play passable defense at RF, but they could not start 30 games on the mound. I would gladly lose our depth at MLB OFs if we could have received a good, young starting pitcher for Santana. I'm sure Stearns would have loved that too, but unfortunately the market for corner OF dried up, and we are in the situation we're in. At the end of the day, "odd" roster and all, we are a talented team that should compete for the playoffs. I am very excited to get the season going after a long off-season.

I find it highly unlikely that CC hasn't communicated to these guys some idea of what their roles are going to be this year & how it compares to their recent usage. Yelich: starting LF, backup CF/RF when Cain/Domingo sit. One game off every other week. 149 starts. (Yelich has averaged 145 games over the last 4 seasons). Cain/Domingo: starting CF/RF. One day off a week each. 136 starts. (Cain has averaged 133 games over the last 4 seasons, Domingo has started 250 games over one full & two partial seasons or about 125 games per full season). Thames: starting 1B vs RHP. 115 starts. (Thames started 103 games at 1B last year). Braun: starting 1B vs LHP (47), LF when Yelich is resting or in CF/RF (65). DH (10). 122 starts. (Averaged 129 games over the last 4 seasons). But those average games are due to injury, not due to being benched when healthy. All of these guys are very good players who would be starting every day for any other team in the league. Injuries don't happen on schedule, so we'll see how things work out.

Stats from teams using a DH shouldn't even be in the discussion when determining where a pitcher should bat. The pitcher is such a different hitter than anyone else, any AL stats (and NL stats in AL stadiums) should be taken out of the data set if you are trying to find the best batting order for an NL (pitcher hitting) roster. The sample set for teams hitting pitcher #8 is getting bigger, so hopefully someone would do a study of teams hitting pitcher #8 vs teams hitting pitcher #9 before making a determinate as to whether it makes sense. You want the data to be as close to apples-to-apples as you can get.

And when that happens, you will have Braun in LF instead of Yelich, negating the positives of having Yelich in RF instead of Santana. Until something happens that changes the roster (injury, trade, etc.), we will always have at least one below average defender in the OF. Good thing is that with Yelich and Cain we will still have a much better defensive OF than we've seen in Milwaukee in a while.

"The 8 spot comes up more often with two out and none on more than any other spot in the order, except third." I would imagine that the vast majority of this data is with the pitcher batting 9th. Would that change if the pitcher (by far the worst hitter in any lineup) started batting #8?

From MLBtraderumors: As third baseman Travis Shaw puts it: “Depth is a nice problem to have, but I’m sure it sucks individually for a couple of guys.” It may not be public, it may not make a difference, but some players are going to be upset when they get benched far more often than they feel they should. We can run numbers and show how in a vacuum everyone will end up with an "acceptable" amount of PAs, but players will see themselves sitting on the bench on days when they feel they should be in the game.

I had a long post typed, but didn't want to bore people to death :-) Deferred salary is essentially a loan from the player to the team. Like any loan a business takes, they invest the money from the loan in an attempt to get a higher return on their investment than the loan costs them. Teams wouldn't do this just to stick it in a savings account. The value is that they can add more payroll in a year they are trying to win, with full knowledge that at some point in the future they will need to pay for it. It is possible they pay for it with increased ticket sales and maybe playoff revenue, but it's also possible it blows up and the team stinks even with the additional player. It's also possible that the team gets "greedy," and even with increased revenues they just add more payroll and don't address the unfunded liability. A lot of smart people have been beaten by debt. Like credit cards, bank loans, or "no money down" promos, this is a financial tool. That tool can be used wisely or it can be used foolishly. Either way, it's a liability (debt) and that debt eventually needs to be repaid.

I'm a "financial guy" too, and the only way I know how to do this would be to fund the liability with a corresponding asset that is appreciating at the level of inflation plus any interest earned in the deferral. Otherwise, the deferred payments have to either come out of future earned revenue or be borrowed. By "operating budgets," are you assuming that the Brewers will pay deferred money out of non-payroll expenses like concessions? That would seem odd. Deferred contracts mean that future payrolls will be less than they could be if the deferrals were not present. The payroll may be higher in five years than it is today, but if there is deferred money involved, it is lower than it could have been if the deferred money wasn't there. There's really no other way around it.

I think more teams will offer early contract extensions, but the value will be dependent on the quality of the player, and whether or not they sign will be on the individual player. "No MLB experience" contracts should only be offered to special players, but early contracts could go to anyone you think could help the team in some capacity at what you perceive to be a discount price for the life of the deal. I love these deals for the team, if I knew a player who was offered this deal, I'd probably recommend he take it, but I completely understand players who decline the offer to try to get more money.

Deferred money is tricky balance. Clearly, in the short term it keeps some payroll flexibility available. But, it has to get paid sometime, and when the bill hits it's taking away down the road... when the player is no longer with the team. I think they have $10m in deferred salaries this year when I looked a few days ago. The argument is not that deferred contracts save money, but that they save purchasing power. That theory on an individual basis is sound, but teams abuse it, using deferred contracts so they can afford to sign more players today, when it will necessarily mean that they will not be able to afford more players in the future when the deferred money is paid out. It's a liability on the books with no corresponding asset (unfunded liability), therefore the liability has to be paid out of current revenues (or borrowed), leaving less money to go elsewhere.

I'm not sure one season of pinch hitting means he's really good at it or it was just just small sample size noise. I'm also concerned that his pinch hitting ability is related to his overall playing time. That is something he won't have with Braun taking his starts at first. I get your desire to have a good pinch hitter but isn't the need for that somewhat mitigated by the fact one of Braun, Santana, Cain, Yelich or Thames are on the bench every day? If I had to choose between someone taking a roster spot just for pinch hitting or using that spot to have more options on the position with the most question marks on the team I'd take the latter. In places we don't have a known quantity then I'm all for having a lot of options. If they can get a lefty reliever for one of them fine. But I think the chances of that are about as good as me getting a spot in the rotation. I am left handed though soo... Yeah, I don't see us keeping Aguilar when it would mean that on many days we would have two guys on the bench who really can only play first base. That would be very limiting. Aguilar can outhit any of Villar, Sogard, and Perez, but their versatility keeps them on the roster. The roster is pretty well set. The only questions are which two of Suter, Guerra, Woodruff will be the 4/5 starters, maybe a bullpen spot, and who will be the extra guy if they keep an extra bench bat for the first week or so until they call up the #5 starter. I would be shocked if we traded anyone other than Broxton and / or Aguilar, and that would be for minor leaguers.

Someone is going to miss a lot of starts until we have an injury, and Thames seems like he'd be the guy to sit most. As you quoted, Thames will be getting plenty of start since most pitchers are righty. The guy who is going to sit the most is Santana which we all already knew because against RHP the OF will be Braun, Yelich, Cain most days. I am wondering who is playing LF/RF in that starting group. Santana will sit quite a bit, but he did hit .276/.364/.505/.870 vs RHP as a 24 year old. Meanwhile Braun had an .808 OPS vs RHP, Thames had a .933 OPS vs RHP, Cain had a .797 OPS vs RHP and Yelich had an .837 OPS vs RHP. It's good to have talent, but it's a shame that we have to sit one of these guys every day.

That's my first thought. I appreciate what he did last year, but he's such a limited player it makes him expendable at this point. I think start with a four-man rotation until #5 is needed a week-and-a-half or so into the season. This will allow us to keep an eight-man pen and a five-man bench. This would allow us to hold onto Aguilar for a while if we wanted. That could protect us some in case someone got hurt early. Otherwise, the spot could go to Broxton.

For now, but Braun isn't going to sit too much. Someone is going to miss a lot of starts until we have an injury, and Thames seems like he'd be the guy to sit most. There are worse things than having excess talent, but we are going to have a really good bat sitting on the bench every day.

Yeah in an ideal world this works out, which would be great and I’m pulling for it. But with the general nature of pitchers and younger pitchers in Woodruff/Burnes and Davies (relatively) it’s almost a guarantee at least one of those guys above isn’t a real option a year from now (or at least an option that doesn’t give us the best chance to win) due to injury, regression or projection/development not met. The flip side of that is that someone can step up that we aren't necessarily expecting, like Burnes did last year. We probably have more pitching talent on the farm than at any other time in Brewer history. Some will make the rotation and many will be good, cheap bullpen options going forward. This is huge for the Brewers if they hope to compete going forward. We can't survive long by trading prospects for vets and signing FAs to eight-figure annual salaries. We just need to make sure we give guys the opportunity, even if we're in "go for it" mode. I wish Hader was in the rotation this year, but since that's not happening I really hope Woodruff gets his shot. He's earned it. I wanted Cobb on a one-year deal because that would allow Suter to be a "swingman," where I think he would be most valuable to the team, with Woodruff in the rotation. Not signing Cobb just means that we will probably put Suter in the rotation, hoping he can figure out how to get through the lineup three times, and we'll have to hold onto Guerra for depth as we will need extra pitchers throughout the year. I'd personally stash Guerra at AAA and let Woodruff pitch (after the initial four-man rotation that will last about nine days), but I have a feeling it's going to be the other way around.

Pure speculation form a tweet referenced earlier. Something along the lines of the Brewers being in on Arrieta. It was probably just the same "in on" as was reported regarding the Brewers and every other available pitcher this offseason. But I've always had worries about Attansio meddling in GM affairs. I think Stearns has done a great job, but that could be hurt if agents start calling Attanasio directly to make deals like he did when Melvin was GM. He seemed to have had an epiphany a couple of years ago. I just hope it stays that way and he doesn't go back to "prospects are great for trade bait, but fans want to know the names on back of the jerseys of the guys on the MLB team."

Mark the date... I may have been right on something. When Lynn signed, I figured the Brewers would try to get Cobb to sign a one-year deal because I don't think they're comfortable signing another big guaranteed contract for 2019 when they have a lot of guys getting arby raises. Some of them could be pretty large. It would have been perfect for the Brewers to get Cobb on a one-year deal and the Lynn signing made that look possible. Signing him for any longer than that might not have worked financially. I do see what TJ77 is saying about Attanasio and Arrieta. He has said in the past that he would be willing to go well over budget for a special player like Fielder, Sabathia, or Grienke. I don't see Arrieta as a special player, but if Attanasio does, then it could be possible he was willing to bust the budget for him. If that's the case, I'm glad we lost the bidding war. I'd rather go into battle with what we have than straddle ourselves with Arrieta on a big contract.

Yep. So when are we signing Tim Tebow :-)

That makes it sound like #2 from McCavy's Tweet is the likely outcome.

We seem to value “chemistry” guys, like Sogard and Vogt who on paper aren’t good players but they seem to do the intangibles well. I think Sogard was re-signed because he's a "professional hitter" who doesn't strike out a ton. Same reason we traded for Yelich and signed Cain when we had a surplus of outfielders. Stearns is trying to get us away from being a high-strikeout team into a higher-contact team. I'll agree that a lot of Vogt seems to be "clubhouse presence," as he has a hard time getting the ball to second base without two or three hops. He has a decent bat for a catcher, and maybe his other defensive aspects are alright, but man did he have a bad arm as a Brewer last year.