Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

monty57

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,995

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by monty57

  1. monty57
    I think it just says that the Brewers can't compete in a bidding war for the year's hottest commodity. They need to find market inefficiencies and spend their free agent dollars there, and they always have to keep a strong farm so they will always have inexpensive players on the roster to give them any hope of obtaining/retaining higher-priced talent. Or, they can get the big market teams to agree to share all television revenue like they do in the NFL so no one has a monetary advantage. Since the big markets like having the advantage, and MLB likes the big markets having the advantage, that will never happen. So, we have to play on an uneven playing field where we can't win by outbidding the high revenue teams.
  2. monty57
    Cole is in his second year of arby, so it would be two years of control, not three. I personally don't want to see the Brewers trading away good prospects for 2-year players, so I'd pass on Cole unless his price tag for some reason was a lot lower than I'd expect.
  3. monty57
    I'd wager that Stearns doesn't actually think Santana is really that good I'd say that he prefers holding onto Brinson and Phillips over holding onto Santana when considering all factors involved (talent level, team control, cost, expected return in trade, etc.). Sometimes you can like something, but like the alternative more.
  4. monty57
    That's a strawman argument. No one here is saying Stearns should sign 8 relievers at $8mil per. I never said anyone did. I've been saying all offseason that I want them to bolster the bullpen, and I still do. The math just adds up that if relievers start to cost around $8M per year we will not be able to afford it long-term without having a lot of homegrown (pre-arby/arby) guys in the 'pen. It's easy to say "we can afford $X for a player," but big contracts add up quickly. Even though we have free cash, it doesn't take too many seven- or eight-figure salaries to eat up that free cash. Without some discipline, it's easy to get financially strapped. I hope we are able to make up some ground in the next TV deal, but right now the reality for the Brewers is that they can't get into the habit of overpaying for players.
  5. monty57
    Probably depends on what you mean by "spend." I doubt they'll max out payroll (probably $110-120M), but they strongly hinted that they were going to spend some money to fill some holes so I'd be surprised if they don't add salary somewhere. Stearns has already said that they have offers out to free agents, so he's not sitting on his hands. Of course he said that because he's not going to say to the fans "We don't really think we had an 86 win team last year and we expect regression this year." Instead he's going to say they're going to be in on free agents and have offers out to them but aww shucks we just kept getting outbid. Going into last season, when they thought they were going to suck, they still went out and made moves to try to improve the roster. We're all anxious to see what the Brewers do, but we have to be realistic. Stearns and Attanasio are not sitting back doing nothing just to see what happens. Even if he believes that they overachieved last season, Stearns would still make some moves to add talent, it's in his DNA. As to Attanasio, I'd guess Stearns has stolen his phone so he doesn't personally call agents making outlandish offers. He's certainly not the type to do what you're proposing.
  6. monty57
    Probably depends on what you mean by "spend." I doubt they'll max out payroll (probably $110-120M), but they strongly hinted that they were going to spend some money to fill some holes so I'd be surprised if they don't add salary somewhere. Stearns has already said that they have offers out to free agents, so he's not sitting on his hands. Purely a guess, but I think they'll end somewhere in the $80-90M range, which would allow for them to add players at the deadline if they're in it, and to give themselves some cushion in future years as more of their roster gets arby raises.
  7. monty57
    Not a bad addition, and it makes the Cubs better, but isn't he basically a "situational righty" with his delivery? That's quite a bit to pay for a guy who you might not want to bring in if a lefty is coming up in the inning.
  8. monty57
    Yes, of course we'll do something. We don't have minor leaguers to fill in every position when prices get high, but that is why we need to always have a strong farm. I am in the crowd that was somewhat surprised when we let Hughes go, but Stearns wouldn't have done that if he didn't have some plan going forward. The price tags probably altered that plan, but we will not go into the season without doing anything to improve the pen. A "real world" example of what I was saying in my last post was that if the price-tag of relievers has gotten out of hand, then instead of getting two FA relievers and going with Villar/Sogard at second, maybe now we get one FA reliever and sign Walker as our second baseman at a reduced price because everyone else spent their money overpaying for a bullpen. Or, maybe we invite more guys to ST who had down seasons last year and capitalize when one of them has a "bounceback" year, which is common in the volatile world of MLB relief pitchers.
  9. monty57
    Hold off on that sentiment for a bit. I wouldn't be surprised if Santana or Brinson end up headlining the deal to bring Archer or another SP to Milwaukee. The "Brewers trying to sell high on Santana" came from a Hardricourt tweet. In McCalvy's article, Stearns has said he hates to move good young players with team control, so the price tag will be high. Of course Stearns is going to talk him up, but I'd guess Hardricourt was giving his opinion, and didn't get that from calling and discussing things with other GMs around the league.
  10. monty57
    Think in terms of relative value. Inflation will bring everyone's price up, so it's best to see what players cost relative to other players. Relievers have always been significantly under-priced relative to starters. The Royals' success made everyone else realize that relievers are more important than they were being paid, so the price shot up quickly. With decent relievers now getting $7-10M/year, we're pushing closer to equal value for a reliever vs a starter, and I don't believe a decent reliever is worth nearly as much as a decent starter. You need a bullpen, but an 8-man bullpen at an average of $8M per is $64M, which the Brewers cannot afford to pay for a bullpen. Going into the offseason, I wanted Stearns to use some of the free cash to bolster the pen, but as others have said you have to have discipline when prices start getting too high. At some point, an "unproven" league-minimum guy like Williams becomes a better option than a high-priced veteran. The bright side to all of this is that all teams have budgets, so there will be undervalued players/positions. Maybe we'll get lucky this year and with everyone in love with average-ish relievers the price tag for second basemen will fall and we'll be able to use our money there.
  11. monty57
    Have to agree with this. Ozuna is kind of a scary guy because last year he posted a .376 OBP but in over 2000 MLB plate appearances prior to last year he had a really mediocre .317 OBP. If last year was the first year of a new Ozuna then this will be a great deal for St. Louis. But if the real Ozuna is a .270/.320/.450/.770 slash player then he really isn't that special offensively. Defensive metrics have him as a plus corner outfielder but below average in centerfield. Well, since he went to St. Louis I'll just have to guess that he'll end up being a star, while the guy they traded away will fade into nothingness.
  12. monty57
    A lot of people read Moneyball and what they learned was that OBP was important. I think what you wrote here was the most important point the book made. Every player is important in their own way. The market will continue to change and overvalue some players or positions while undervaluing others. The key is to determine what is undervalued and stock up on that, while "selling high" on overvalued assets. Since the Royals made two straight World Series, everyone has been gaga over relief pitchers. The Brewers were able to capitalize on this in several trades during the rebuild, but if the price tag has now become too high, I won't be upset if Stearns uses his resources to buy some undervalued players.
  13. monty57
    True, but it's December 13, 2017 and opening day is March 29, 2018 I'm anxious too, and it's made worse by the Cubs and Cardinals making headlines. I just have to constantly remind myself (or have my wife remind me) not to get too worried. The Brewers will make some moves that will help out the team.
  14. monty57
    The Cardinals and Cubs are going to do what they can to get better. We just have to stay on plan, as we are headed in the right direction. We had a good 2017 and hopefully the moves we make over the next couple of months will allow us to remain competitive in 2018 without doing anything to hurt 2019 and beyond.
  15. monty57
    I really hope that we will do something to bolster the pen this offseason, and I think we will. These prices make me glad that we have a lot of pitchers in the minors, some of which will make the MLB rotation, but most of which will have their best shot as MLB bullpen guys.
  16. monty57
    I'm with those that don't want to trade a lot of our farm for a 2-year player. I could understand trading to get four years of Archer, but not for a 2-year guy unless the plan is to go for it in 2018 and then flip Cole for prospects after the season. I don't think that's the plan, so I'd pass on Cole. It's a hard time for fans, as it is really, really tempting to target someone like Cole, but I think the trade would hurt the franchise in the long term. The short-term outlook feels good today, while the long-term outlook is what could transform us from "the same old Brewers" to what the Cardinals have built over the years.
  17. monty57
    You have to look at it in more than a one-year time frame. I understand that keeping Hader in the pen might be better for the 2018 Milwaukee Brewers. However, if he is put in the rotation, throws around 150 innings, and continues to develop he will be far more valuable over his time as a Brewer as a starter than as a reliever. This is probably the biggest decision for Stearns & Co. this offseason. I'd much rather have Archer than someone with 1-2 years left, so it's really about how much it would cost to get him. I keep flip-flopping on this. We just spent a couple of years building up our farm to build from within, so I'd hate to throw that to the wind and trade away too many prospects for one MLB player. It sounds like the Brewers are really trying to get someone to pay up for Santana, and I'm sure he's the guy we're floating as the headliner for Archer. To me, that means the Brewers value Brinson more than they value Santana, so the question may be whether or not the Rays would want Santana or if they'd demand Brinson. That may determine whether Stearns pulls the trigger on the deal. Losing Santana would hurt our offense, but hopefully Phillips/Brinson can play well enough to limit that harm. If so, and if including Santana in the deal will allow for us to hold on to more of our top prospects, then I could get behind this. We will run into the wall at some time and start losing guys to Rule 5, so some of our prospects should be used as trade chips. We just need to determine which guys we will not trade, and which ones make sense to move for MLB parts.
  18. monty57
    It's not one pitch 70% of the time, but back to Randy Johnson, he threw 52.8% FB, 38.6% Slider, so basically a two-pitch pitcher. He threw the occasional change-up for most of his career, then gave up on that when he started throwing a splitter more at the end of his career. Ben Sheets threw 63.1% FB / 30.7% curve ball for his career. If you're going to make it on two pitches, they'd better be darned good pitches. Hader could potentially do that, but would obviously be much better off if he can get the change-up to league average.
  19. monty57
    Every team stacks up RH hitters against LHP. The argument that teams would do that against Hader could basically be an argument to never have LH starting pitchers. Hader has the type of slider that RH hitters hate. They will swing at a pitch that ends up hitting them in the back foot. Of course he's better against LH hitters, but he can certainly get RH hitters out. I hate making comparisons to great players as it's unfair to the player, but Hader reminds me of a shorter Randy Johnson. He has some control issues, which could make him more effective if hitters don't feel comfortable in the box, but when he's on his fastball/slider combo makes the best hitters in the game (guys like Harper and Votto) look absolutely foolish. No one else does that, so to me that means he could be special. I think we should give him every chance to prove that he is special as a starter where he will have the most value. If he doesn't cut it, then we know he can be moved back to the pen and be great there.
  20. monty57
    My concern with keeping Hader in the pen is mainly that he has never built up innings. If he starts 2018 in the rotation and is skipped every so often or moved to the pen/shut down later in the season, he could get around 150 innings and be set up to be a full-load starter by 2019. He will not get enough innings out of the pen, so if they wanted to convert him to a starter in the future he would be limited for a season and by the time he'd be ready to pitch a full season he could already be into his arby years. Plus, he's proven that he can dominate in the pen using almost exclusively his fastball. Those who would like to see him improve his secondary pitches probably won't get the chance if he isn't forced to use them. He has what could be a dominant slider and a good enough change to keep hitters off guard. It's kind of a Catch 22, but as a starter he will have to use these pitches more. That may mean they get hit a little more until they develop, but they may never fully develop unless he's forced to use them. If the Brewers don't think he'll develop enough to be an effective starter, then they should probably leave him in the pen. If they think he has the ability to be an effective starter and just needs some development, he should be in the rotation.
  21. monty57
    The Cubs are jumping quickly to get their guys. I expect Cobb to go there soon, and then they'll be pretty much set for opening day. I was hoping that they would have to break the bank on someone so they'd be pressed against the luxury tax threshold in the next couple of years. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that is going to happen. I think they're having a good offseason in that they're filling the holes in the roster with quality players while keeping a cushion to help account for future arby increases. That kind of bums me out, so I'm just waiting for Stearns to make some moves that I can be excited about.
  22. monty57
    Agree. He'd look good in our rotation, but is it worth Brinson plus some other good prospects to get him?
  23. monty57
    Waiving Scooter who would go on to hit 27 HR and knock in 97 runs in under 500 AB was not a "minor blemish". It cost them a playoff berth. But worse was getting 2 nondescript minor leaguers for a guy who would go on to do something no Brewer hitter in history has done, that is hit 40+ HR in back to back seasons. I'm speaking of Krush Davis. It's not that he traded Davis. Eventually that was going to happen. But he jumped the gun and settled for minimal return. Davis was clearly blossoming as a premier power bat at the end of 2015. He just hadn't put it together over a full season due to an injury earlier that year. Stearns has done a lot of good things, but he severely mis-evaluated two players who were already here when he arrived. What really does someone need to do on this board to be banned? I mean, this trolling has gone on for months! I don't get why it bothers some people so much. Whether I've agreed or disagreed with him, I think Briggs has added a lot to this site over the years, and the bothersome thing to me is that every time he posts other posters feel the need to derail the thread with responses that add nothing to the conversation. Let's please try to keep this on topic.
  24. monty57
    I'd be pretty surprised if Cobb isn't signed by the Cubs in the next day or two. If/when that happens, they will have filled most of their holes for the next few seasons without breaking the bank or having to trade away from their MLB roster. I agree though, that if we have to sign an expensive FA starter, I'd rather see Lynn on a 3-4 year deal than Arrieta on a 4-5 year deal. If we're going to be stuck overpaying a guy in a few years, I'd rather it be around $13-15M for Lynn rather than $20-25M for Arrieta. If Lynn requires $17M a year as you are stating ($58/4), then I really hope we stay away. He's been solid and probably underrated through his career, but I just get a bad feeling that he's going to be an injury time-bomb, and we could get hurt badly on the signing. He has a lot of mileage on his arm.
  25. monty57
    Chatwood was my top choice for the Brewers due mainly to him being one of the only guys under 30 on the market. Sucks that he went to the Cubs, but now it's time to see what Stearns does to improve our pitching.
×
×
  • Create New...