monty57

This is pretty much how I feel. I mentioned this in the Urias thread, so I'll just do a quick recap here. If (as I expect) Burnes, Woodruff and Adames are all traded, then we should have a couple year period with a lot of pre-arby guys on the roster and a low payroll. It could make sense (and fit into the payroll) to extend some of our "second tier" guys for a couple of extra years. They'd play an important role in helping the team remain competitive and would be off the books when the current prospects start to get expensive in arby. If price is around the same, I would much prefer extending Urias or Lauer than Tellez. Lauer because we will need five starting pitchers and he's proven to be an effective one. Urias because he matched Tellez's 110 wRC+ while playing multiple positions that are all harder than first base. So, if we have payroll room to extend all three, then go ahead and do it. If not, then Tellez is the first on the chopping block. I would add an asterisk to this. Lauer's complaint was that the team wasn't doing everything they could to win now, so he probably wouldn't want to extend with a team who was trading away Burnes, Woodruff, and Adames and going with a bunch of pre-arby guys.

I've felt that the obvious choice all along was to trade Burnes prior to free agency. Same holds true with Woodruff and Adames. That one went through the arbitration process and got upset with what he heard, while the other two signed deals so they didn't have to go through arbitration doesn't change anything in that regard.

We all know the team has some major personnel decisions to make in the near future. As it stands now, Urias' team control goes through 2025, which is his 4th arby year. He's set to make $4.7M this year (year two arby), so I think it'd take more than the 4 year/$25M contract proposed in the article, but it wouldn't break the bank. In 2026, the only players from the current team who will still be around are Yelich (through '28 + '29 option), Ashby (through '27 w /'28 & '29 options), Toro (final arby year in '26), and our pre-arby guys which are pretty much Taylor, Mitchell, Contreras and some role players. Guys who could debut this year (Frelick, Turang, Wiemer, Chourio) could hit arby in '26 or '27, depending on when they're brought up. Depending on what other decisions are made, that could give us a fairly inexpensive lineup for a year or two. Someone like Urias could give us a decent veteran option for the '26 and '27 seasons when he should be able to fit into the budget while the current prospects are making their way through pre-arby and into their early arby years. Of course, I would like to see them extend as many of the current top prospects as possible early on, in which case Urias would be a nice complementary piece to the guys who will be our core players for most of the next decade. My one concern with extending him is that he was underperforming until Adames joined the team. I recall an article stating that he prefers to kind of play in the shadows rather than being the center of attention, and Adames' personality took the spotlight off of Luis. I have no idea how Urias' play will be effected when Adames is gone, which could be after this season. The team has a lot more insight into that than any of us ever will.

I consider extensions once a guy's into his arby years akin to signing free agents, as you aren't going to get too much of a discount for the free agent years. Therefore, I think you have to ask "if this guy was a free agent, would we realistically be going after him?" For guys like Burnes and Woodruff, that's a resounding no. Urias is a definite maybe. Urias has a decent bat and positional flexibility, so there should be a role for him even as some of the prospects make their way to the majors. If the Brewers could get a little bit of a discount for taking some risk off the table for Urias, an extension is worth exploring.

Yep. The move to 3T0 baseball around the league has sucked a lot of the joy out of watching baseball. Banning the shift just makes it more likely teams continue to put "all or nothing" guys out on the field. Runs may be around the same as before, but it's a lot of nothing for most of the game, then a couple of walks and a home run for all the scoring in the game. To me, it gets really frustrating watching a runner sit in scoring position while the next few batters swing out of their socks and strike out. Just make contact and you've got a good chance for a run. This is one reason I'm excited to see some of our prospects. We have a lot of high-contact guys coming up, which should be fun to watch.

People see success differently. If I run a drug company, and the research department finds the cure for cancer in 2023, but it won't be available commercially until 2024 or 2025, I would still consider that a very successful year. In other words, if we use 2023 as a springboard to future success, than that could be viewed as a successful season, even if the major league team didn't play to expectations.

Yes, @Jopal78, it is going to be difficult for the $120M Brewers to have the firepower of the $355M Mets, $272M Yankees, $256M Padres, $243M Phillies, $221M Dodgers, etc. The Brewers laid an egg last year, as talent-wise I think they were closer to the '21 team than what they showed last year. A number of things went wrong, but I don't think talent-wise they were nearly as bad as they showed. Our team scored 725 runs in '22 vs 738 in '21. The bigger problem was that we had a lot of injuries to the pitching staff, which gave up 688 Runs in '22 vs 623 in '21. We do have to hope for health, but so does every team. When healthy, our pitching staff probably should be closer to the third best in the majors, like they were in '21, than what they showed last year. The offense is a bit more uncertain, as we've had more changes. On the positive side: 1) On the offensive side, the '21 CFs set the bar pretty low. Mitchell doesn't have to do much to overcome their offensive production. 2) While McCutchen's 98 wRC+ isn't horrible, it isn't good for a DH, and he never should have been cemented into the top of the order. Almost any of our hitters would have been a better choice as a #3/4 hitter vs RHP. Winker should be an upgrade here. 3) Adames had a dismal .278 BABIP, causing his OBP to suffer (.298). This would hurt anywhere, but it really hurts when he sat in the 2-hole all year. While that could happen again, it shouldn't be expected. 4) Narvaez had a down year offensively, and Caratini wore out as the season went on. Even with a Sophomore slump, Contreras should be an offensive upgrade. On the negative: 1) Renfroe was solid offensively. Taylor has decent overall numbers in his career, but he probably won't match the offense Renfroe posted. Even assumng Frelick or Wiemer are called up, we could see a decline offensively here. On the positive, we should see better defense. 2) Anderson hasn't been very good the past two seasons. He could bounce back, but he could also post another 0.5 WAR like he did last year. Turang is waiting in the wings, but I don't know that they'll match the production Wong gave us last year. So overall, I see reason to believe that the offense could be a little better, and the pitching should be a lot better than we saw last year. That would put us around where we were in '21. But, I'm an optimist. The games still need to be played.

McCutchen hit for a wRC+ of 98 as the primary DH/top of the order bat last year. That's the bar for Winker, whose career average for wRC+ is 126. Narvaez was a 1.1 (Fangraphs) WAR player last year. That's the bar for Contreras who accumulated 2.4 WAR last year. Even if the new guys underperform to the level of the guys they're replacing, but we just don't have the excessive injuries to our starting pitching that we had last year, we should still be in the playoffs, which we just missed last year even with McCutchen entrenched at the top of the order, Narvaez hugely underperforming at catcher, a complete mental meltdown because someone was traded, and a slew of injuries to our pitching staff. We weren't nearly as bad last year as some posters make it out to be. We have most of the pieces back, and Winker and Contreras should be big upgrades at their positions.

I think that there is a very high probability that Winker will easily outperform all of the rookies at the plate. As a DH, Winker is a much better choice than any of the OF prospects. However, all of the rookies derive positive value in the field as well, which is where Winker falters. Winker was a good pick-up, as he'll help solidify the offense, shouldn't be required to play much in the OF, and is here on a one-year deal, allowing the team to wean in the prospects but opening a spot for them next year when they have more experience.

Well written article as usual. I agree with your points on what would make for a successful season. 1) Playoffs. Like last year, it's hard to call a season a success without it ending with some playoff games. Ideally, it would go even farther, but I'm a "playoffs are a crapshoot" guy, so I don't think the season is a waste if they get beat in the playoffs. 2) See how the players develop. This goes for everyone who has a future with the team. How will Peralta's arm hold up this year? How will the upper level prospects play, and when will they hit the majors? How will Contreras do in his Sophomore season with a new team? We've seen the farm move up the ranks, will this trend continue even as we start to graduate some guys to the majors? 3) At this point, I think the pending free agents will be resolved next offseason unless there is catastrophic failure which leads to them being traded at the deadline. Therefore, the only way that affects the success of this season is that they all need to stay healthy and play well. I don't necessarily consider last year a failure, as they did get good development on the farm, but from last offseason to this one, we went from being considered the odds-on favorites to win the division, and maybe even make a World Series to "these guys can't keep up with the Cardinals." That certainly can't be a success. If we're looking now until this time next year, if we're going into next year (after the rookies have more experience and we've done what we've done with the pending free agents) with fans excited and thinking that we are still a playoff favorite, then this year (12 month period) will probably have been a success.

Ah, I misread. You meant “provide value over Wong” rather than “provide any value.” My bad. After last season, many/most posters thought the Brewers would decline Wong’s option. That they were able to get Winker and Toro when many thought they’d pay $2M to buy out Wong and get nothing of value leads me to say it was a pretty good deal.

I agree, but I'm not overly concerned with the WAR he ends up with, as we all know that WAR is not handed out generously to DHs. I like it as a stat, but it's really not a fan of the DH. If Winker gets anywhere close to the 142/147 wRC+ level he was at in '21 and '22, he will be extremely valuable to this team, regardless of what the WAR formulas say. Edit: David Ortiz posted a 147 wRC+ in 2004 and Fangraphs credits him with 4.2 WAR, so there's that benchmark to follow. It took a 175 wRC+ in 2007 to get his high-water mark of 6.3 WAR. Winker is not peak David Ortiz, but if he hits like he did a couple of years ago, he's pretty darn good.

I hear this all the time, but just last year the Mets got beat in the Wild Card game. After all the things Cohen did and money he spent, did they "waste everyone's time" or "prove they weren't trying to win" by getting beat in the Wild Card series? Meanwhile, the #6 seed Phillies (with whom the Brewers were fighting for the final spot) made the World Series. As has been said many times, in baseball it's about getting into the playoffs. Once there, any team can win. It's about who's hot at the right time. The moves made in the offseason are to try to put together a team that can make it through the rigors of the season and get to the playoffs. A lot of things, both positive and negative, can happen between now and October. Right now, I'd say we're a legitimate contender to win the division, which is the first bar that needs to be passed to reach the ultimate goal of winning it all. Give Arnold another $100M and I'd think that would buy a few more wins. Given what he's got to work with, I think he did pretty well.

I don't disagree that some things have to bounce right for the Brewers, but can we at least give them a 2-year average? Last year's team wasn't much different than the '21 team that would have won 100 games if they hadn't sat their starters for the last week plus. There is a lot of talent on the roster, but last year we lost 20-something games combined between Peralta and Woodruff. That's like losing most of a season of a top-of-the-rotation starter. Not many teams can overcome that without at least losing a few more games. A few more games would have gotten us into the playoffs. The team will be looking for a bounce-back from Winker, but as I mentioned earlier, he was injured so there's reason for his down season. Prior to the injury season, he was one of the best bats in the game. Anderson's another bounce-back guy, but I think his bounce-back would be "gravy," as the expected scenario is probably that he plays okay for a while, then we bring Turang up and run a rotation of guys in the infield like Counsell likes to do. Bottom line, give me a $120M team without question marks. I think the Brewers did pretty well with what they have.

I went into this offseason expecting the team to cut payroll, and I've never thought a long-term extension to Burnes, Woodruff or Adames was going to happen (although I've speculated of what I thought was a fairy tale scenario where Woody could stay). So that left a pretty tough path to improving the team. However, I also remember that last year's team was basically the same team that should have won 100 games in '21, so I figure there's a very strong core to work with. I really think people are underrating how good a bat Winker has. He was hurt last year, and it appears he and some of his Seattle teammates didn't get along, which is something you never heard of in Cincinnati, so I'm not worried, but it could have effected his play... he still posted a 109 wRC+. In his two previous (and injury-free) years, he posted consecutive wRC+ of 142 and 147. Here are some of his 2021 comps, Ohtani (151), Judge (149), Matt Olson (147), Kyle Tucker (145). Not bad company. If we had added Ohtani or Judge's bat, some here might be excited, but if Winker is over his injuries and goes back to what he did in '21 and '22, then that's basically the type of bat we added. This is a huge get for the "win now" crowd. Then there's Contreras. I don't think I've seen anyone anywhere say anything bad about this move from a Brewers' standpoint. It's really hard to say anything bad about acquiring a guy who was brought over for an unheralded prospect after having an All-Star season in his rookie year and still has five seasons of team control. This was a move that immediately improves the team, and will help them for years to come. Miley kind of surprised me, as it leaves the team with seven starters who will all start the year on a major league roster. Miley's contract was written in a way which states that he's probably going to start, so I'm sure the Brewers have a plan. At the very least, they now have seven viable MLB starters. Last year, the biggest reason we missed the playoffs was that we lost a lot of starts from guys like Woodruff and Peralta. We now have some additional insurance, which is already being tested with Ashby's recent "arm fatigue" statements. Plus, if they're all healthy Houser and maybe one other (Ashby?) could be used to strengthen up the pen. If Anderson plays like he did at the start of his career, then we just acquired a borderline All Star. If not, then he's a viable placeholder to get us another service year for Turang. I believe there were some injury issues, so we'll see what we get. For the price, it's hard to be upset with this acquisition, especially since Turang is a phone call away. I won't make this long post any longer, other than to say that I think we addressed our most glaring holes, while still cutting budget and not committing ourselves to long-term deals. I think we won a lot more than most will give us credit for.

Interesting article. It looks like he throws a lot of his fastball right down the middle against righties, which would seem to mean that there is a lot of deception to get the swings-and-misses, but if they aren't deceived, they hit it hard. Either that, or he misses a lot down the middle and gets hit hard, but when he places is well he gets swings and misses. With the precision he has against lefties, it makes sense they hit a lot of weak grounders against him, and it also probably means the "either that" line from the previous paragraph is incorrect, as he couldn't be that precise with his fastball against lefties and that erratic against righties.

We've had this discussion before, so I know what your response will be ("teams don't trade top prospects in the offseason"), but at this point we are down to trading them next offseason unless they somehow are out of it at this year's trade deadline. Personally, I would've traded one of the pitchers this offseason, but at this point that seems highly unlikely. Therefore, next offseason it is. I believe (though I know you don't) that teams would be excited about the prospect of bringing on Cy Young talent, so I think they'd be willing to give up some value in trade. We have talent outside of the pending free agents, but not enough to remain competitive if all we get are draft picks who won't be in the majors for several years if ever. By bringing in some more young talent in trades, we can remain a competitive ballclub for years to come. It'd probably be a step back in '24, but generally when you're trading one year of a good/great player, you get a lot of years of prospects, and you gain more "WAR value" over the next six years+ than you gave up. We didn't make the playoffs with those three players last year, so while I think we're a playoff-caliber team, nothing would be guaranteed by hanging onto them until free agency. I look forward to watching this year's team, as I think they should be battling for a division title all season, while also seeing some of our future starters "get their feet wet" in the major. Then, I expect there will be a lot of trades, and I look forward to seeing the young talent that will be brought in, and how the future will be shaped.

I get the desire of fans to keep "their guys," but extensions this late are really not awarded much of a discount, so they aren't much different than signing a big-named free agent. Most people realize that the Brewers shouldn't try building the team through big-named free agents, so it seems logical that we shouldn't try building around extending guys once they're already well into their arby years. We should try extending guys early in their pre-aby years, like we have with Braun (first deal), Lucroy, Peralta and Ashby. For the players who don't sign these early extensions, we need to realize they are going to be year-to-year players, and determine at what point it's best to trade them prior to them leaving for free agency. That's true no matter how good the player is, or how much of a "good clubhouse guy" we hear he is. Extending any of Burnes, Woodruff, or Adames at this point would probably be a mistake. Letting them walk in free agency would definitely be a mistake. So to me the questions are: (1) When's the best time to trade Burnes, Woodruff, and Adames? (2) Which of our young prospects will sign early extensions?

I went back and re-read the "Sal Frelick" thread from last year to revisit how everyone was feeling at the time. All-in-all, not a bad read and worth re-visiting. Hindsight being 20/20, we can look at the timeline to further understand people's feelings in the thread: -Cain was fired mid-June. -Taylor had a wRC+ of 58 in June, but I don't know what was before/after Cain's release. -He only played in 9 games in July (injury??) when he had a 130 wRC+ -When he came back full-time in August only hit for a paltry 67 wRC+ at which time people really started calling for one of the prospects to be called up. Many of the posts were something like "Taylor hits a HR every week or two to keep his numbers up." It wasn't so much that people hated Taylor, but more that they wanted a prospect (assumed to be Frelick) and his high-OBP skills brought up. -Once he went back to more of a 4th OF role in Sept/Oct, he had a 151 wRC+ So maybe I was harsh on him, but when given the starting job he got hurt and then didn't play well. That's probably not overly predictive, but when he was starting most posters here wanted him replaced. I hope the best for him, as he'll probably be the Brewers opening day RF, but I expect we'll see a lot of calls for him to be replaced in the first couple of months of the season. He plays decent defense at all three OF positions. For his career, he has been a slightly above average hitter (106 wRC+), which translates to a decent hitter for a CF, but a below-average corner OF. He is a low OBP (career .303, .286 last year with extended playing time), higher SLG (.452 career, .442 last year) guy. Last year we had a roster filled with low OBP / high SLG guys, and Taylor fit right into that mold. We'll see how our moves have changed things. Looking at all this hasn't changed my thought that without regard to service time, I would absolutely want Frelick and his high OBP style as a starter over Taylor. I hope that Taylor does well and helps the team for his time as a starter, but I expect him to be replaced by a prospect when the service time issues are cleared up.

I was always a proponent of giving Taylor a chance to start, but when given that chance last year he blew it. Maybe it was just bad timing/small sample, but he appears to be better as a 4th OF than as a full-time guy. He plays decent defense across the field, and as he's right-handed while Yelich, Mitchell, Frelick and Winker are all left-handed. I'm not saying let him go, as I think he'll play a big role on the '23 team. I'm just saying that I don't think his numbers will hold up if he gets 600 PAs a season. I think that Frelick would be a better full-time player in '23 than Taylor, so I think that if Frelick is going to start the season in AAA, it's for service time reasons.

Okay @brewerfan82 and @sveumrules, you caught me on a rant as I would like to see Frelick up on Opening Day. It is good to see that Winker is better vs LHP than I thought. He'll probably get cemented into the 3/4 hole everyday just like McCutchen was, but at least there is hope that he won't be completely horrible vs LHP, even if he should at least be moved down in the order. As to the "CF costing us games" comment, most were calling for Frelick to be brought up, and the only semi-logical argument why he wasn't was that the Brewers wanted him to retain rookie status in '23 for the new ROY rules. Surprisingly, it was Mitchell who was called up over Frelick, and since he still retains rookie status, the Brewers could get a draft pick if he does well enough in ROY voting. It could be argued that had Frelick been brought up a month or so earlier, it would have helped clear the hurdle to get into the playoffs. Taylor was bad, and while Davis provided value with magnificent defense, he struggled offensively. Hopefully Taylor plays better as our starting RF for the first month or so of '23 than he did as a starter in '22. As to Frelick, I think that he will be in AAA exactly as long as it takes for service time issues, and then will be starting in the majors. I like Taylor as a 4th OF, but not as a starter, and I like Winker a lot more as a DH than as someone who has to spend a lot of time in the field.

I think this is accurate. It sucks to have your better options in the minors while guys like Taylor are starting in the majors, but teams do it all the time, and it should get us another year of Turang and Frelick in their prime. At least from his quote, Frelick appears to have a good attitude towards it. Not like Bryant who sued the Cubs over this same thing. Anderson's versatility helps cover all the positions, and we'll likely see Winker in the OF more than many here have predicted. If Anderson regains his form, Turang could be in the minors for a while, but I doubt they'll keep Frelick down for a day longer than they have to for service time concerns.

I agree with that. Of course there will be some injuries, but basically a 5-man rotation gives each starter around 32 starts (162/5 = 32.4), while a 6-man rotation would give them 27. I don't want Burnes and Woodruff to lose five or six starts each. We need them pitching as much as they can. As you mentioned, Ashby could be the odd man out and end up as the "long man/spot starter." I don't see Lauer getting this role, so if they want Ashby in the rotation, Lauer should be traded.

Houser has proven that he can pitch out of the bullpen, and at present his value to the team out of the pen is probably higher than the value he could get in trade. So, I think that barring injuries between now and opening day, he'll be in the 'pen. That still leaves six starters without options. At this point, I don't see them trading Burnes, Woodruff or Peralta. It appears that Miley was signed to be a starter (the innings pitched clause in his contract wouldn't be there if he wasn't starting). That leaves either (a) send Ashby to the pen, (b) trade Lauer (c) go with a six-man rotation. I don't like option C because that would mean a lot less starts for Burnes, Woodruff and Peralta, so either Ashby goes to the 'pen or Lauer gets traded.

As much as many here, myself included, have said that Winker is our DH, I do not believe that the team has ever said that. If Frelick starts the year in AAA, I would bet that Winker will spend some time in the OF, probably flipping spots with Yelich when he needs rest. It looked to me like they would be starting three rookies on opening day, but it's looking more-and-more like they will only be starting one. It may be a plan to call them up as soon as they'll retain an extra year's service time, which has been done countless times with prospects over the years. I'll believe that, because the other option (they don't trust rookies) wouldn't jibe with them being a small market in today's baseball economic environment. Keeping Mitchell down so he could retain his rookie status while fielding Taylor and Davis at CF last year was one of the reasons we missed the playoffs, but I guess Taylor will suddenly be a viable starter now. Hope it works for them. I still expect a pitcher to be dealt, and I don't think they'll use Hiura correctly, so I'd like to see him dealt. That said, I now see the opening day position player roster as: C: Contreras 1B: Tellez 2B: Urias SS: Adames 3B: Anderson (backup corner OF) LF: Yelich CF: Mitchell RF: Taylor (backup CF) DH: Winker (backup corner OF) Bench: Caratini (backup catcher), Hiura (waste of spot, but I'll say backup 1B/2B/LF/DH), Brosseau (utility IF, starter vs LHP), Toro or Miller (utility IF). Brosseau will probably start at 3B vs lefties, with Anderson going to RF and Taylor to CF. Winker will play LF when Yelich DH's. They won't have an OF on the bench, so Anderson and Winker will have to move there when one of the starters needs a day off (or when Taylor proves that he shouldn't be a starter) Winker should never play against LHP. Ever. They will probably put Hiura in as DH against LHP, and he's probably the only guy on the roster who hits lefties as bad or worse than Winker. With what they're probably rostering, the best bet will probably be to DH Brosseau with Toro at 3B and Anderson in the OF, or just let Mitchell hit against LHP, which I don't think Counsell will do.