monty57

Anderson is probably going to be the RH corner OF to start the season, and will probably get a lot of playing time in the OF until Taylor returns or they bring up a prospect. Hiura can also play some games there if he's still around on opening day. I was originally on board with Frelick being on the roster on opening day, but I think the Brewers are being pretty clear that they prefer to start the prospects (outside of Mitchell) in the minors to save service time. Frelick acknowledged this early in the spring when he said he expected to start the year in the minors. It'll be a couple of weeks before they can bring a prospect up without costing them a year's service time. It'll be a couple more weeks from then until Taylor should be back. We can make it with someone like Naquin and Anderson manning RF until then. They've mentioned repeatedly how the team sees Blake Perkins "as a part of the future," so that seems to point to him starting the year in the minors. That leaves a backup CF, and Owen Miller is listed as a CF on the team's site, so he could be a utility guy who can give Mitchell a day's rest if he needs one in the first couple weeks. If they think Winker's surgery was a success, and they want to give the roster spot to someone other than Naquin, they could let Winker and Anderson cover RF for the first couple weeks until Frelick/Wiemer gets brought up. That could open a spot for Toro, who could help out at 3B if Anderson is getting a lot of time in the OF. We're talking 2-3 weeks to start this season to add a year's service time when Turang, Frelick, and Wiemer are in their prime. I can accept Winker's defense in the OF for four or five games if it means we get another full year of Frelick.

Not really any surprises. I think that Junk can help out on the MLB team this year, and thought he may make the squad as a multi-inning reliever, but he hasn't looked too good in the small sample he's had this spring. They probably want to keep him working as a starter in Nashville, as most of their "MLB ready" starters will have to be in the MLB roster to start the season and may not be stretched out when/if an injury occurs.

No, they're not robots. They're kids who are being offered a chance to lock in a guaranteed life-changing sum of money vs. shouldering the risk injury or underperformance to potentially make more. They are going to be facing pressures from all sides, so they really need to rely on their agents to give them good advice, and hopefully they have some other people in their lives they can trust to help guide them through this. It's a huge decision that most people will never have to confront. I understand and respect the player for whichever decision they choose (taking the guaranteed money or going year-to-year). The thought that some "pundits" will deride them for the choice they make shows the character of the pundits. I just think that it would be prudent of the Brewers to explore the option and offer what they think makes sense for them. The prospects will each make their own individual decisions on whether or not to take the offers, and the Brewers should then act accordingly. If they sign an extension, the team knows they have a core piece to build around. If they choose to go year-to-year, the team needs to understand that the player will be trying to maximize their earnings, so they should look to trade them when they're in their arby years.

Yelich's contract goes through 2028 (not including option buyout and deferred money). The Chourio extension I mentioned would start in 2024. The first six years of any of these extensions will still be cheaper than the final "free agent" years, and probably cheaper than they would be expected to get if they went year-to-year to maximize their potential pay. by the time he'd get more expensive, Yelich would be gone. Ashby/Peralta-type deals never really get too expensive (Freddie's making $3.735M this year, and $5.735M next year before the option years kick in). Again, the point of guaranteeing the extension money is that you pay less than what you would expect to pay without the guaranteed extension. Therefore, Chourio and others who would sign would still be in their "cheap" years while Yelich was still under contract. Some of the players may underperform, while others would overperform. However, the team would have cost certainty on these players and would be able to budget accordingly. Most of the prospects probably won't take a Peralta-style extension, although the thought that Chourio and others are locked in may help sway them to accept. The ones that do should easily fit into the budget for the "Yelich years." A Woodruff/Burnes/Adames extension would be far more burdensome on payroll than these extensions would be, as they would be really expensive at the same time Yelich is making $26M/year. I think that with a few of these deals in place, there would still be money left over for some 1-2 year free agent signings to fill in the inevitable holes in the roster.

You may be talking about Carroll, I was talking about Chourio, who was born 3/11/2004, so he turns 19 in 2 days. From previous posts, I think we agree on our take on extensions. I was just pointing out that generally speaking the "some people" who like to argue this were never put in that position. They're probably a bunch of old guys who are still working because they haven't saved enough to retire and they're shouting that young players should go year-to-year to maximize their potential return.

The Brewers should absolutely use this as a template for a Chourio deal. I think it's safe to say that they plan to bring him up either this September or early next year. If they can sign him to this deal starting next year, he can be up on opening day and the team has gained extra years of control and cost certainty for a guy who looks to be a star they can build around. Then, they can work on Peralta/Ashby-style extensions for some of their other prospects, and they'll have a nice core group locked up long-term.

How many of those pundits were offered a deal at 18/19 years of age that set them up so even if they got injured tomorrow and never worked another day in their life, they would still be one of the richest people on the planet?

Yeah, those guys are important to have around for their versatility, but you don't want to have to rely on them too much. Basically, you hope they get their hot streak at the right time, when they're filling in for an injured player, but don't expect the hot streak to last. They knew what they had when they signed Miller. What he does in spring shouldn't greatly affect their plans for him.

Burnes will be too expensive, and seems to be the poster boy for the union to try to set the market as a free agent. No chance on him. I'd rather have Turang plus the money saved between his price tag vs Adames, plus the prospects we'll get back in trade. Play Adames one more year, then trade him and let Turang man the position for the next six years. Woodruff is probably going to look for a longer deal than the Brewers should be willing to sign. He turned 30 last month, so he'll be going into free agency in his age 32 season. He'll get one shot at a long-term deal, so it would be dumb for him to settle for an extension buying out a couple of free agent years. He'll get $10.8M this year, and probably $15M or so next year and then someone will sign him to a deal that takes him into his late 30's. The Brewers shouldn't sign him to a deal that takes him to his late 30's, so I don't see them matching up. Enjoy the team this year, in what will probably be the last year with those three guys. It's also the year that some of our prospects will get some necessary MLB experience. We'll get a lot of young talent back next offseason to go along with the guys we already have, and we'll have a lot of money freed up to make some "fill in the gap" free agent signings (guys like Avi Garcia who sign 1-2 year deals to start). We'll extend some of our young talent and continue in the attempt to remain "continually competitive."

I think we're making a bit too much of this. A full year's service time is 172 days. There are 162 games, and seasons are generally around 185 days long. If we're not worrying about Super 2, and are simply trying to save a year's service time, then Frelick/Wiemer (whoever they want to play RF) will be down around two weeks. Pretty much any "AAAA player" would be an acceptable stopgap over a two week period. IL stints are covered by "less than stellar" players all the time. Now, if the Brewers are worried about Super 2 status, then we might have concern about who will be the starting RF for the projected month that Taylor will miss. Of course, Taylor is no sure thing, so I'd be a bit concerned if the Brewers are planning on keeping guys down until June. I think Mitchell will be on the opening day roster, and we'll see Frelick or Wiemer a few weeks into the season with other guys coming up as necessary. Of course, they could also start the year with Wiemer and send him down when Taylor comes off the IL. As long as he's down for around two weeks, they gain a season. Of course, that could be hard to do if he plays well for that first month, while no one will care if Naquin is sent down after a good April.

Injuries suck, but they happen. In most cases when a player is injured, the reserves are a step down. No different here. It is possible that the Brewers change their mind and decide to keep Frelick up. They could get draft compensation if he's up there in the ROY voting, but they'd lose control over his age 29 season in order for them to get an upgrade for a few weeks this season. Meanwhile, signing someone like Profar would just keep players like Frelick and Wiemer down when they're probably ready to make the step to the majors. It's an injury. They'll have more of them this year. They'll get through it, and hopefully the difference between someone like Naquin vs Frelick over a few weeks won't be what keeps us out of the playoffs. Heck, maybe we get lucky and Taylor's replacement gets on a bit of a hot streak during his time in the spotlight.

Good point about having a decent backup CF. If it's only for a few weeks to start the season until they can bring up Frelick, then they may be willing to risk it and hope Mitchell can play everyday. If it's going to be longer, then they will definitely need someone who can play passable defense in CF.

I think Brosseau is below average defensively anywhere you put him, but he can play 2B or 3B. Depends on whether they want to keep Urias at one position or move him between 2B and 3B. Both of them are probably better at second base than third.

This makes the Anderson signing look really good. I think the Brewers would rather keep Frelick in the minors to gain service time. Anderson's ability to play 3B and corner OF allows the Brewers to keep another utility guy like Toro or Brosseau. I think that someone like Naquin now makes the opening day roster, with Anderson playing RF vs lefties and Brosseau playing 3B.

There are CPAs on this board who could go into a lot more detail than I, but the Brewers are set up as a limited partnership. Each of the owners get a K-1 each year and the profits or losses of the Brewers pass through to the owners' personal taxes. This is why I doubt that the Brewers make a ton of income every year. The owners would pay taxes on this income, and they may not receive any cash if they decide to keep the money in the business. Conversely, if they take a loss, they may have to dig into their own pockets to put money into the business. For some that may not be a problem, but for others it would. I think that the Brewers project their revenues and set the payroll so there are a few million dollars in projected profits. That gives them a little "downside protection" if things don't go as well as planned, some room to add to payroll if things go well, and it isn't a huge tax hit if things go as planned. The "real money" in ownership is in the long-term capital gain. Year-to-year they don't want a huge tax hit, and they don't want to have to dig into their own pockets to pay the bills.

Milwaukee is the smallest market in baseball, and is generally in the middle of the pack (around league average) for payroll. I've illustrated in my previous posts that I think they could probably add a bit this year, but are being cautious due to last year's ticket sales numbers dropping, and the pending bankruptcy of their TV provider. Both of these are valid reasons for caution, but if they play out positively (ticket sales come back, TV deal pays out) they should have room for mid-season payroll additions. With that, they are 19th in projected payroll going into 2023, if you believe Sportrac's $104.8M number or 20th if you believe Cot's $114.7M number. It appears 2012 is the only time they pushed payroll over league average... they missed the playoffs, traded away Grienke and entered a period of mediocrity in 2012 which ended in the only "rebuild/retool" in Attanasio's tenure, so I'm glad they realized that pushing up payroll relative to the rest of the league doesn't necessarily lead to good outcomes. I hope Milwaukee keeps a baseball team forever, but if Attanasio had the opportunity to swap his MLB team location for his AAA team location, he'd probably be able to field a much higher payroll. I doubt many major sports franchise owners could say that.

I think you hit on the most important point. Does Attanasio still enjoy being an owner, or does he see it as a "headache." Values of teams continue to rise. This may not always be the case, but if I were an owner I would expect the value in the future would be significantly greater than the present value. Therefore, the reason to sell is not that they will get the best price by selling now. Barring health issues or financial duress, the reason to sell is simply that the owner no longer wants to own the team and would rather spend their time doing something else. Owning a team is more of a status symbol than anything else, as compared to what they did that allowed them to buy the team in the first place, it's not a big income generator. No one knows what Attanasio is feeling, but outwardly he sure isn't showing anything but enthusiasm for owning the Brewers. Maybe the complaining of players and fans, and the uphill battle of owning a small-market MLB team are getting to him, but he's not publicly showing it. I would guess that the answer to the thread topic is "no," and I sure hope that's the case. Be careful what you wish for, the next owner may not be nearly as good.

I think this is a good possibility. In addition to Anderson acting as a backup OF, if Winker's surgery worked, he could be a better defender than he's shown the past couple seasons so he could see more time on the field than we're all thinking. Then you're looking at whether it makes more sense to keep someone like Toro or Brosseau over someone like Naquin, and even whether we keep someone like Hiura who could DH while Winker is in the OF. Yelich, Mitchell, Winker in the OF with Hiura at DH would be a nice "vs RHP" mix. There really are a lot of directions the team could go, and I think they'll lean towards keeping the prospects (other than Mitchell) down for a while for service time/Super 2 reasons.

I think that a lot depends on how Anderson performs. My guess (barring injuries) is that Anderson will start at 3B, with Urias moving to 2B. Turang will likely start in AAA. If Anderson falters, Turang will only be in AAA long enough to save service time. If Anderson plays like he did early in his career, then there will be no rush to bring Turang up. He's the natural replacement for Adames when he is likely traded next offseason, so saving Turang's service time for when he's our starting SS will benefit the team long-term. Toro was a nice pickup, as he can play all over the field, and he still has enough "prospect luster" left that maybe, just maybe he could break out. However, he's far enough along that you don't mind burning through his service time as a bench player. If he gets hot, he could earn himself some additional playing time, but as I started this post, if Anderson falters it will likely be Turang who takes over as an everyday player. But, the spring will be interesting, as several different scenarios could play out. Anderson could be used more than expected as a corner OF, opening more time at 3B. Hiura is an enigma, as they didn't play him last year when he was seemingly the best option vs RHP, so why did they sign him to a seven-figure salary? Post-surgery, can Winker play better defense, freeing up the DH spot more often than we expect? Will they hold onto Brosseau as a "lefty killer," taking up one of the spots Toro/Turang are fighting for? All-in-all, it' good to have depth, and it's good to have players with positional flexibility. It opens up a lot of options.

I hope it's not a lost season, but it's sure not starting off well. He said it himself in the article, a labral tear sounds really bad. Hopefully the treatment works and he can come back 100% and this isn't a permanent, lingering issue. As to how the season plays out, a lot will probably depend on other players' injuries and where he's needed. If our rotation is banged up, they'll probably stretch him out and slot him into the rotation. That may mean his start date is pushed back while he ramps up his innings limit, but when he gets back it will be as a starter. If the rotation in generally healthy, then I could see them bringing him back sooner as a multi-inning guy out of the 'pen. I think the "play it safe" route is the way to go. Missing a little extra time now to make sure he's 100% when he comes back will help out in the long-run.

I think that shows the value of a good owner. Attanasio bought the Brewers prior to the 2005 season. They were coming off of 67, 68 and 56 win seasons, and hadn't had a .500 or better season since 1992. In 2005, the team went 81-81, and they have only had seven (including the playoff 2020 season) losing records in the 18 years Attanasio has been the primary owner. Prior to Attanasio, the Brewers had two playoff appearances from 1969 (Pilots) to 2004. Since Attanasio bought the team, they have made the playoffs six times (33% playoff rate). All this with the decided financial disadvantage that small-market teams live with. Contrary to popular belief, the owner is the most important person in sports. He or she hires the entire management staff, which performs all of the tasks necessary to put a team on the field. Anyone can get lucky in the short-term, but over the long-haul, well managed teams will win more than poorly managed teams. I've had some complaints about Attanasio over the years, but he has proven to be a good owner who is focused on putting a good product on the field. Fans have every right to boo whoever they choose, but anyone who boos Attanasio is pretty short-sighted.

Again, the team went into the 2022 season with an opening day payroll nearly $10,000,000 higher than their previous record high. That's substantial, so I think it shows that Attanasio agreed that it was time to "pony up." Then ticket sales plummeted. It's easy to say "spend more" when it's not your money. No matter what Attanasio spends (even $10M more than the previous record), anyone can just say "it wasn't enough, it should have been more." The reality is that businesses have budgets based on real numbers. Those numbers show that it makes a lot of sense to cut budget this year until they can see if ticket sales bounce back and are able to be certain that they will receive the promised payments from Bally's as they fight off bankruptcy.

First, I think that the late signing of McCutchen pushed them over budget last year. Attanasio probably signed off on it because he was getting a big-named player who could help out on a presumed playoff team. The opening day payroll would have been around $123.4M, and the signing of McCutchen pushed them to $131.9M, which was nearly $10M more than their previous high. It may seem sad, but signing McCutchen was the small-market version of a "go for it" signing. Then, ticket sales came in lower than expected. In McCalvy's article on this, Rick S. suggested that it was likely due to lower corporate sales as businesses were concerned about bringing large groups to a ballgame with Covid still a big concern going into last season. If he was correct, ticket sales should bounce back this year, but it should be understandable that the team would be cautious in projecting sales. Budgets are based on projected sales, so that is probably the biggest reason the team felt the need to cut payroll for this season. There is also a good chance that it had something to do with needing to shed some payroll (aka Hader) last season. Finally, to add to the lowered sales in 2022, they were probably projecting some revenues from the playoffs, which they obviously didn't get. Going over budget for a signing, and then getting substantially less revenues than expected is a solid reason to cut the budget going into this year. Going back to $123.4 would probably put them in line with where they expected to be last year. We're currently at $114.7M projected OD payroll by Cot's. If ticket sales bounce back, they will probably have a good chunk of money available for a mid-season add, but I don't blame them for setting the budget based on lower projected ticket sales. It's the smart thing to do.

This showcases why depth in starting pitching is so important. When Miley was signed, many (myself included) started wondering which of the starters would be traded, and what they would get in return. Others cautioned that any move would wait until at least mid-March, as "these things have a way of working themselves out." Those posters are proving to be correct. Without the Miley signing, we would be relying on Houser to figure things out, and any additional injury would have us wondering if someone like Gasser or Small were ready for the majors. Hopefully, we will stay injury-free for the remainder of spring training, but Houser is a better "fall back plan" than most teams have if someone else goes down and he needs to start the season in the rotation. Signing Miley and holding onto his depth has to go down as another smart move by Arnold who quietly has had a pretty good off-season. Now we just have to hope that Ashby's "arm fatigue" is nothing serious or permanent, and he's back in the mix sooner rather than later. We will need his services, and the further we get from spring training, the less able Houser will be to step into the rotation without an extended period of "stretching him out."

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.