monty57

I agree that it's unfair to ever compare anyone to a Hall of Famer. There just aren't many other guys to compare Hader to, because I have never seen anyone make guys like Bryce Harper and Joey Votto look foolish. So, Hader is 23 and had 12.84 K/9 and 4.15 BB/9 in his first season in the majors as a 23 year old. Johnson made it to the Expos in 1988 (born 9/10/63, so he was around 25 when he was called up), when he threw 26 innings. The Expos traded him to the Mariners during his rookie season, a year in which he struck out 7.26/9, while walking 5.38/9. He didn't get his K/9 above 10 until 1991 when he was 27/28 years old, and that year he walked 6.79/9. It wasn't until 1993 that he finally learned to keep his walks down. Even while walking guys like crazy, he had value as a starter, accumulating 10 WAR in those 4+ seasons, and averaging around 6 innings per start. Once he got some control, he became a dominant force who somehow was able to keep it up for a looong career. I would guess that some here would have been lobbying for the 25 year old who couldn't throw strikes and only had two pitches to be moved to the bullpen, or just kept in the minors until he learned how to throw strikes. Heck, the Expos traded him away. Fortunately, the Mariners saw enough from a guy who had definite control issues and who threw his fastball/slider combo around 95% of the time to keep him in the rotation. Eventually the control came around and his tertiary pitches got good enough for him to throw them around 10-15% of the time and he became the Randy Johnson everyone knows. Comparing anyone to Randy Johnson is unfair, but we have a guy who can do things to hitters that other pitchers just cannot do. We need to try to maximize the value of this guy while we have him because, as others have said, he is the best option we've had for a homegrown #1 starter since Ben Sheets. By the way, even with the walks, Johnson was often able to keep his WHIP in the low 1's because he was so hard to hit, but he never posted a 0.99 WHIP like Hader had in his age 23 season... but Hader will never be a starter because of his control issues.

As I've mentioned, if the Brewers feel that Hader is not destined to be a starter, then they should keep him in the pen until they trade him down the road or let him walk as a free agent. I just don't like the thought of keeping him in the pen for a few seasons and then converting him to a starter, as I think that limits the total value he'll bring to the Brewers over his time here. If the Brewers think he will eventually be a starter, they should convert him now. We only have him for six years, so we have to do what's best for the Brewers over those six years, not what's best for the 2018 team, and certainly not what's best for the big market team who will get him in free agency when we can no longer afford him.

And this is why it was necessary to sign another "proven" guy like Chacin. I like Woodruff, and think that he should be a lock for the 2018 rotation. I also think Hader should be given a shot. I love prospects, but that is plenty of "unproven" for a rotation. We needed some "proven," and Chacin gives us that. At some point in the season, guys like Wilkerson and Burns will get called up. By 2019, this year's rookies will have a lot more experience and we'll be able to make decisions for next year with a lot more information than we have now. But we really needed to get someone else in there, we couldn't go into the season with Anderson and Davies being the only guys with any kind of a track record in the rotation.

I saw a note earlier in the thread & I think the point bears repeating - Chris Sale was in the ChiSox bullpen for his first 2 seasons in the majors. Hader, if in the bullpen for 2018, would be following the same path. Now personally I think Hader should be a starter until its clear he is best suited for the bullpen. That said, if the team lacks a good arm to replace Hader in the pen at the moment, his staying out there for the time being (this 2018 season) does not close the door on his going into the rotation at a later point. The key will be DS going out to get someone that can fill the void in the pen or someone internally stepping forward to take the spot. I agree that he could go be converted to a starter after two seasons in the pen, I just think that it limits the value the Brewers receive from him. We'd get him for 1.5 seasons as a reliever, his final pre-arby year as a 150 IP starter (increasing his arby cost), his first year of arby as a 180 IP starter, then start looking at what we can get for him in trade, possibly get one full season of him as a "no innings limit" starter if he wasn't traded, and then almost certainly trade him away before his final season so we don't lose him in free agency. If he is converted now, we'll at least get more "maximum value" years as a starter. Plus, if we have any interest in extending him, it should be done early and we'll have a lot more info on which to base that decision (and what the price should be) if we see what he can do as a starter. If I were him, and thought that I could start, I'd never extend with a team that's valuing me based on being a reliever. If we wait until he's proven himself as a starter and that's when he's around his 2nd arby year, we'll basically be paying free agent cost to sign him. If he's as good as he could be, we won't be able to afford that. That was kind of confusing :-) Basically, I'd like to put him at starter. If he shows that he can handle the role I'd try to extend him to get some of his free agent years. He could be really expensive if he lives up to his potential, and signing him early could allow us to get those years at a price we could afford. If he turns into Chris Sale, he's not spending his career with the Brewers, but at least we could get a couple more seasons out of him if we act quickly.

We needed at least one starter. I never liked the thought of signing Darvish or Arrieta for what they'll get, and trading for someone like Archer would take a big bite out of the farm Stearns and Melvin spent the last few seasons transforming from awful to pretty good. I thought that if we were going to get a veteran on a short-term deal it would be a total reclamation project, and even that would cost us around $7-8M. Don't expect Chacin to be an ace, but he is better than I expected if we went this route. He should be a fairly solid guy to put behind Anderson and Daives in the rotation, and gives us three (hopefully four with Woodruff) guys we can pencil in every five days without gritting our teeth hoping it's not a complete disaster. Add in that he is about to turn 30, so we get him for his age 30 and 31 seasons, not going deep into his "decline years," and I don't see any reason at all to complain about this signing. I don't have any idea how the rest of the guys will play, but if they perform like they did last year, then Chacin could certainly "move the needle" enough to get us that extra win to get us into the playoffs.

If we sign another starter, I'll agree that means Hader is in the pen. There's a good chance that Gallardo was signed as a reliever, so Hader could still be our de facto #5. I'd just hate to think that we turned our shot at a Randy Johnson or Chris Sale into an Andrew Miller. Talk about the value of relievers all you want, but I don't see anyone taking a good starting pitcher and converting them into a "shutdown reliever." Think how good the Braves could've been in the 90's if they had just put Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine in the pen and signed some innings eaters to get them to their shutdown pen. Again, if the Brewers keep him in the pen I hope it's because they strongly believe he will never be a quality starter. Keeping him in the pen until he's late in his pre-arby years or early in his arby years and then converting him to a starter just limits his overall value to the Brewers and sets him up for a huge payday from another team when he's a free agent. If he's destined to be a starter, they're best to do it now.

When we signed our stream of 30-something "meh" pitchers under Melvin, they were usually 3-4 years in the $10-13M / year range. That's the market, so that makes this a discount to the market. I am glad we have Wilkerson at AAA, and am sure that he and others will get their opportunity to play for the Brewers in 2018. Every team needs quality depth, and having some solid young options as "injury insurance" could be what gets us into the playoffs vs missing the playoffs by a game or two.

I'd rather have a proven starting pitcher for 2 years / $16M than an unproven relief pitcher for the same price. I've mentioned in other threads that everyone paying up for 2nd tier relievers means some positions will have to be undervalued. I think Stearns did well here. Now lets see how that 2nd base market is playing out.

Any input into who he played on the road? In only 80 innings, a lot of things could really skew the numbers. He could have just faced some teams with stud lefties who had good games. Or, being in the NL West, his road numbers could be a lot of Arizona and Colorado, with the other pitchers park being home to the Dodgers who aren't easy to pitch against. Not trying to make excuses, just something to look into if anyone has some spare time.

I think Gallardo is slated for the pen as someone who can go multiple innings, alongside guys like Suter and Guerra who can also go multiple innings. Having a few of these guys should be a blessing when we have a young rotation. Stearns likes flexibility, and guys in the pen who can go one inning, multiple innings, or even spot start can give a team a lot of options.

I think it means that the Brewers are filling out their roster without spending big money on a FA pitcher or spending big in terms of prospects for a trade. While not sexy, it's probably the prudent thing to do. I'd argue that Gallardo and Chacin aren't "the same pitcher." As a starter, Chacin has been much better than Gallardo. I think Chacin is being signed to fill a spot in the rotation, while Gallardo was signed as a multi-inning reliever. In a perfect world, Hader will start until Nelson is ready, then be moved back to the pen or shut down to keep his innings in check. Burns and Wilkerson will be the replacements when someone gets hurt. Then Hader, Burns and Wilkerson will all be ready to compete for spots in the 2019 rotation. We'll see how much faith Stearns is putting in Chacin when we see the number of years. If it's a one-year deal, he's basically filler until Burns is ready, and is a flip candidate at deadline. If it's a multi-year deal, then Stearns probably looked at numbers like those Brew4U posted and thinks he is a nice "sleeper" middle-of-the-rotation arm for a few years until more of our prospects are ready.

Also, remember that: 1. Anderson 2. Davies 3. Chacin 4. Woodruff 5. Hader will be supplemented with the return of Nelson and the addition of guys like Burns at some point in the season.

We'll see if something bigger comes up, but it looks like the Brewers are looking for stopgaps until Nelson is healthy and the prospects are ready. Hopefully this is just a one-year deal for an "innings eater." He could put up okay numbers, but I wouldn't count on that for 3-4 years. Edit: If this is that case (one year deal to a vet), I'm fine with this deal. The Brewers either needed to do something big for a guy who could be their ace for the next few seasons, or something like this to fill a rotation spot as our prospects continue development.

Someone earlier posted that he was moved to the bullpen and put up decent numbers. Is it possible that from the pen he lets loose (ergo the uptick in velocity) and gets guys out, while as a starter he holds back some and gets rocked? Or maybe his secondary stuff isn't as good anymore and he doesn't have to throw that as often from the pen? It is entirely possible that Stearns picked up Gallardo as a multi-inning guy for the pen.

If they decide to keep Hader in the pen for 2018, that doesn't mean he can't be moved to the rotation in 2019 right? Hey, I've been in the "Hader as a starter" camp too, but we don't know what the Brewers know. Maybe they want to keep the innings off his arm for another year. Maybe they want him to really focus on his secondary pitches. Who knows, but I'm not going to freak out if he's not a starter this year. He has a long career ahead of him, and they can make that transition any time. I agree that the Brewers know more than we do, and there could be a reason why they feel he will never be a starter. But if they do feel he can be a starter, I think they should do it now. The reason I worry about pushing his move to the rotation to starter back a year is that the innings limitations he'd have this year he would still have in 2019. If he is put in the rotation in 2018, he's probably limited to around 150 innings. In 2019, he'll be able to 180 or so, and after that there would be no innings limits. Pushing this back a year means that he won't be off of pitch limits until around his second arby year, which is probably about the time we're discussing how much we could get for him in trade. Whoever we trade him to, and whoever signs him as a free agent would be very happy we took that track, but we wouldn't maximize his value to the Brewers. Now, if we announce an extension that gives us a couple of years of free agency, that concern would be lessened, but if we feel comfortable enough to give him an extension now, we should feel comfortable enough to give him a spot in the rotation.

If a team is willing to occasionally go against what the pundits say, full scale rebuilds aren't always necessary. The Yankees were able to flip Miller and Chapman for a stocked farm that makes their future look really bright. Many in the media and many fans couldn't believe that the Yankees were "giving up," but it was the right move. I have never understood the short-term thinking that makes most teams unwilling to trade away assets mid-season if they have even the most remote chance of making the playoffs, or during the offseason if they have a solid option ready to move up from the farm. A simple willingness to trade away players with less team control in favor of younger players with more team control can go a long way in limiting the extent of down-times.

I don't think we'll do strict "piggyback," but having a few bullpen arms who can go multiple innings is a good thing, especially when we have some young starters. Some days Hader, Woodruff, etc will go 6-7 innings, and that's great. Some days, they'll go 3-4 innings and need the "long man" to pick up a few innings. If you "piggyback" Hader, that guy isn't available when someone else has a bad outing. If you have a few guys in the pen who can go multiple innings (or go one inning if that's what you need), you have a lot more flexibility in managing your pitching staff. Like having Perez who can play any position, flexibility is valuable when the player is allowed to play when and where he is needed. Why add the rigidity of a "piggyback" when you have the flexibility of several multi-inning guys in the pen? I think that's a nice weapon to have that can give you an advantage over 162 games.

I agree Luke. The luxury tax and revenue sharing have helped, and I expect the stiffer penalties applied going forward will make more teams stay under the "cap." The problem for the Brewers is that the tax is set around 2x what the Brewers could hope to put out there for max payroll. Hopefully, as the Brewers continue to do things to build and maintain a strong fanbase their TV deal will go up, allowing them to get into the next ring, where they're at something like a 25% disadvantage instead of 50%. It's kind of sad that the Brewers need to hem-and-haw over $8M/year deals, but I'd rather see them stay disciplined and not overpay for players just because they have some extra money to spend today. That's a bad habit, so while I want to see some moves, I want them to be "according to plan" with what Stearns and Attanasio have drawn up. Over the long haul, that is what is going to get us where we want to be. We still have a lot of offseason to go, but honestly I'm impressed that Stearns has shown so much willpower. It would be really easy to cave in and just spend the money.

I hope for more, but Gallardo looks like a placeholder until either Nelson is back or someone like Burns is ready to be called up. It's still early, so there's a good chance that this is a fallback plan in case nothing better arises, with Gallardo going to the pen if we sign someone else. Being optimistic, this may mean that Nelson is looking better than feared. Much of the reason I've called for signing a starter is that I don't expect much from Nelson in 2018. If he's only going to miss a month or two, there is little reason to spend big on a starter so it makes sense to sign a stopgap.

Not in free agency. If both options are executed Archer will be 4 years / $33.75M. The Cubs just signed Chatwood for 3 years / $38M. By trade? Per Fangraphs WAR, Archer was tied with Kershaw at #9 in 2017. Greinke was #7, so we could probably trade for him if we had the ability to pay him $34-35M per year for the next four seasons. I don't think there are many others out there in this tier of pitching that are available. All told, Archer's probably comparable to Quintana, for whom the Cubs gave up a boatload of prospects last season. If we want to get someone who is somewhat cost controlled for more than a year or two, we're either going to have to get him from the farm or give up a whole lot of young talent in trade. I'm not all in on trading for Archer, but I'm not against it. It just depends on the price. We can afford to part with one of Santana / Brinson, as we have a lot of good MLB ready outfielders. I hate losing high-minors pitching, as someone like Burns or Ortiz has the potential to give us six solid years. Stearns needs to determine what guys he's comfortable giving up, and if the price tag is too high, we don't make the trade.

Let's break this down into simpler terms. The price for relief pitching is clearly inflated. Prices are irrefutably on the rise. None of the relievers on the market have signed with the Brewers. It appears as though the Brewers would have had to offer more to all signed RPs so far with perhaps Swarzak as the one exception. Thus yes, the Brewers would have had to overpay to get someone to sign on the dotted line. Three other points to consider. One, all free agent relief pitchers who could reasonably be considered a positive addition to the pen have not yet been signed. Two, there will almost assuredly be RPs who have yet to sign, who will later sign at lower annual amounts, who will prove very valuable in 2018. And three, the offseason is not over yet. Every team has a budget. The difference between the payroll and what's already committed is the amount they have to spend in the offseason (I call this their "free cash"). When prices for one commodity increase, teams paying the higher prices use up more of their free cash then expected, leaving less money available to spend elsewhere. No one is really paying for starting pitching or second basemen yet. If the Brewers are really lucky, maybe these will be areas where we can get a bit of a discount to expected prices.

The Brewers already have two first basemen and five outfielders. Good to see money going off the table in positions the Brewers don't need.

Everyone puts their free cash into paying the inflated market price for relievers, so the Brewers get a huge upgrade at 2B for a bargain price. That'd be nice.

I think that as a general rule, when the Brewers have a solid prospect who is ready to replace a "proven" player, they should try to move the "proven" player to make room for the prospect. The "proven" player should get them more in trade while the prospect will give the Brewers more team control and years of playing for well below market value.

I don't know if Tampa will go for it, but Stearns is definitely going to try to use Santana as the headliner instead of Brinson. If he's the headliner, we're trading a younger, cheaper MLB-proven player, so he could potentially limit the quality/quantity of prospects we'd have to send. Meanwhile, we'd greatly improve our rotation and still have an OF of Braun/Phillips/Brinson with Broxton as a solid backup.