monty57

Broxton is interesting. In only 414 AB, he was a 20/20 guy who plays a premium defensive position, and he has tons of potential. But, he strikes out in about 1/3 of his plate appearances and has tremendous hot & cold streaks. I think he needs to be shopped around. Some teams wouldn't touch him, while others would salivate over his potential. If Stearns can find one GM who thinks he could be a star we could get a decent return. I just don't know if that GM will be out there looking for a CF this offseason.

1) The Brewers should have as much money to spend as anyone this season. They may not think it wise to outbid everyone for Swarzak, but if they choose to spend the money they could do it. 2) Thames was signed this past offseason for 3 yrs / $16M, so you can find talent for around $5M. The Brewers now have an extra $5M to spend on an upgrade somewhere instead of having to spend another season hoping Garza will find his old self for a season. I fully expect the Brewers to get one or maybe even two starting pitchers this offseason from either the free agent market or trades. Dumping Garza opens up a spot and frees up some cash for Stearns to find better options.

I wouldn't get my hopes too high that Braun will retire. Not only would be be throwing away a lot of money, but there is no way he feels that he's "a shell of his former self." Teams get stuck with contracts all the time. I have been torn over whether I wanted him to be traded over the past couple of seasons, but if you're going to get stuck with a contract at least Braun is still somewhat productive and can go down as one of the only good players to be a Brewer for life. He'll end up with most Brewer offensive records, and we'll finally have another player who deserves to have his number retired. We only have four of those in the history of the franchise, and two or those (Aaron and Fingers) only spent a small part of their career as a Brewer.

I figured that last offseason was our last chance to trade Braun. There didn't seem to be much interest then, so I've just accepted that he will be a Brewer for the rest of his contract. He's still a capable hitter, but he'll miss time with various injuries. That makes it good that we have some outfield depth. That said, I could still see the Brewers trading Broxton this offseason, as Phillips and Brinson are both ready (or very close).

This is a really key point. You need stars to win, but you still need 25 men on the roster. When you can fill your "role player" positions (back-of-the-rotation starters, bullpen, bench, etc.) with MLB-caliber talent playing for league minimum, that leaves you with more payroll to afford your stars. When you give eight figure deals to second-tier free agents, it's easy to max out your payroll with "B" or "C" level talent, and you end up with big holes you can't afford to fill. We have some star caliber players in the minors, but I'm also excited that we have a lot of players who should be able to contribute to the MLB team in a lesser manner. These guys should allow for us to always have a lot of guys playing for league minimum, keeping the payroll lower so we can afford some higher-priced guys, whether that be free agent signings or extensions to our own star players. Stearns looks to be building the franchise like the Astros, where we will hopefully have excess talent in the minors. Some of this will be traded for MLB help, while the rest will keep a steady stream of pre-arby talent making its way to the MLB roster. Some of these guys will be stars, and others will be role players, but they'll all help the team.

How about if sponsors bought tickets that were never distributed? Then the sponsor overestimated and wasted some money. The Brewers still received that money. If you sponsor an event, you want as many eyes as possible seeing your ads, so you wouldn't purposely do something that would result in fewer people in the park. Plus, what you are alleging is that the Brewers are artificially inflating attendance figures, which would increase the cost of sponsorship. If you think sponsors are buying loads of tickets that they have no intention of distributing, I'd ask why on earth would the sponsors willfully go along with the Brewers in an illegal scam that would result in higher prices for themselves and fewer people actually seeing their ads? Crimes do occur, but there would be such limited upside to doing this and such a high probability of them being caught that it seems highly unlikely that this is going on.

I don't understand how artificially inflating attendance numbers would benefit the Brewers in any way. If they were doing it as leverage in TV negotiations, that would be fraud, so no one would let them get away with that. MLB would have to know about it, and the Brewers' accountants and other outside vendors would have to be in on this, putting themselves in a position to face prison time right along with Attanasio and Schleisinger (or however you spell it). Are you suggesting that they are committing fraud simply to get the fans to feel better about themselves for supporting a sports franchise?

Being positive about the direction of the franchise and for the future is different than being bummed that we just missed the playoffs. Everyone who loves the Brewers should feel down that we just missed the playoffs in the final days of the season. That doesn't mean you can't feel optimistic that we have a lot of good, young talent in the franchise which should bode well for future teams. We were in the second year of a rebuild. We just sold off a lot of good MLB talent. Teams in that position generally go through a period of 90-100 loss seasons before they ever get close to reaching .500. We just missed the playoffs, so we are far ahead of where we "should" be at this stage of the game. We still have areas that we can improve upon, but turning the ship around that quickly is borderline miraculous. After the shock of missing the playoffs passes, instead of fretting about the moves that weren't made, or those that didn't turn out the way we planned, try looking at all the moves that were made that turned out better than expected.

I agree bill hAll Star. A lot of the "older" guys will be helpful for a few more years, and then be good trade bait as they head into their final year(s) of team control. I like signing extensions to guys in their pre-arby years that buy out a couple of years of the player's prime. Arcia should get offered an extension, Hader probably should but the earlier poster who mentioned it may be tough because of the question of whether he's a SP or RP had a good point. Santana would be a good guy to offer an extension to if he is part of your future plans. I don't see a lot of value in offering extensions to guys who are already into their arby years, as you are essentially paying market (free agent) prices at that point so you don't get paid for assuming most of the risk. Nelson may have been an exception to that, as it's hard to outbid everyone for a good SP when they hit free agency, but his injury puts the kibosh on offering him an extension until we know how he'll pitch when he returns. As to the Villar/Perez discussion, I think at least one of them is traded, and it will probably be Perez. You know what you have in Perez, so it's easier to figure out a trade value for him, while Villar could greatly increase his value if he has any kind of a bounceback next year. I think we need to get some guys in the lineup who make better contact. We won't be able to make huge strides in that direction all at once, but getting a "professional hitter" as a utility guy instead of Perez will be one step in that direction. Going off the list from the initial post, and assuming that some guys like Torres and Perez will probably be gone, that gives us probably $50M or so in free cash that could potentially be spent. I am very interested to see how Stearns plays this. We will almost assuredly spend on a couple of good bullpen arms, we will probably address second base, and we will likely acquire a starting pitcher. The big question to me is whether the starting pitcher will slot in around #3 or if we will shoot for a guy who could be our #1.

I'm sure the payroll will be expanded substantially, but I hope that Stearns will still be smart with money. Melvin's goal seemed to be to find a way to spend the money allotted in the budget whether it helped the team or not. I'd rather look at it as an available resource that can be tapped if it makes sense. I agree that there will be some extensions, but they won't really effect the payroll immediately (most of the committed money will be in future years), so there will be some additional vets on the 2018 roster acquired either by free agency or trade. I expect some relievers, maybe a 2B, and a starter acquired who are under control for 2-3 years. I do think that if the right situation arises, we could go for the "home run" on a starting pitcher. I just hope that if we go for the "home run," this would not be a "Greinke-type" deal where we sell the farm for a guy with two years left. A free agent signing, or a trade for a younger guy with 4-5 years left would be more palatable. I think the more likely scenario will be that we sign a solid vet like Lynn to a 2-3 year deal or take on salary in a trade for a decent SP with 2-3 years left.

It's possible to Thames/Aguilar was a fluke that will regress in the future, but if you're looking at how we will add wins to 2018, it will be difficult to find a way to improve on the numbers we got from 1B in 2017. The holes in 2017 that we could hope to improve on are CF, which will likely be filled by a combination of Brinson/Phillips, 2B, the bullpen at the start of the season, and the last couple of rotation spots in the second half of the season. I expect we do something at 2B, move Hader to the rotation, add another starter, and add a couple of quality relievers. As to the strikeout total, that's probably going to be a longer-term fix, but for now there are a couple of things that could help: -having Brinson/Phillips as the CF/4th OF should improve on having Broxton/Perez as the CF/4th OF. -we could find a 2B who is a contact-hitting / high OBP leadoff hitter -re-sign Sogard as a utility guy, using Perez as part of a trade

I love that the Brewers are taking an ownership position, and I hope they will be able to do more of that in the future. History has shown that minor league ownership groups will do what they perceive to be in their best interest, leaving the Brewers out in the cold. That can't happen if the Brewers are the owners.

You sound a bit upset about the way Stearns built a roster that just exceeded expectations by about 20 games on a very low payroll. There is little doubt that Attanasio will raise the payroll significantly. We still need to trust youth, but some of our holes will be filled with more expensive veterans, and I would not be surprised if the Brewers pull off a move that gets us a big name. I have no problem with that, as long as it doesn't change the long-term plan of continually adding young, impact talent at all levels.

At a year-end press conference, he's not going to go into detail about things they're going to do this offseason, but this statement from Counsell is pretty telling that they're going to spend money. That means free agency and/or trading for veterans. I just hope that Stearns is able to convince Attanasio that while we add to the MLB team, we still need to maintain the strategy of continuing to add young talent to all levels of the system. I expect Hader moves to the rotation, we find another starter in free agency or trade, we retain Swarzak and add another quality reliever. But I also expect that Stearns will do a lot of things that no one expects, so I think it will be a busy and interesting offseason.

No way are both Wilkerson and Burnes on the 25 man, it could be one or the other but no both. We already have 2 young starters in Woodruff and probably Hader in the rotation to start 2018. He could go with 3 young guys, but I think it will be 2 and a free agent to go with Anderson/Davies. Though again I wouldn't be shocked if they went straight to Burnes. Burnes is a college pitcher and has plenty of innings on his arm, if he proves capable in spring he could easily win a spot right away. I agree. Anderson and Davies are locks. I think Hader will be given a chance to start, and Woodruff probably has the inside track right now. I think we'll acquire another SP either in FA or trade to take up the other spot, putting Wilkerson and Burns in AAA to start the season, which is pretty good insurance when the inevitable injuries strike. Plus, hopefully Nelson will be back at full strength at some point, giving us a nice "mid-season pickup."

According to at least one thread on this board a year or so ago, all the moves we were making were designed to tank last year and this year to get top draft picks, because that was the only way we would ever be a playoff-caliber team. I guess Stearns really blew that strategy. Better fire the guy ;-)

I'd say the MLB guys who could net something and who could be expendable would be one of Aguilar/Thames, and one of Broxton/Santana. Perez could also have some value to a team looking for a versatile player with a decent bat. All of these guys have value and have helped the Brewers at the MLB level, but could be moved without doing too much harm since we have other in-house options. That doesn't mean that Stearns will be able to make a "home run" deal with any of them, but they'd be the guys I'd use if I was going to make a deal. Of course, our prospect depth can be used as add-ons in any trade. Guys in our "Top 20-30" range could probably be in the top 10 in some organizations and may never get the chance to see the light of day with the Brewers. I wasn't thinking anything like trading away Knebel.

With Keston Hiura and Isan Diaz getting closer to the MLB, I don't think Stearns will need to look for a Shaw-type trade. 2B can be more of a stop-gap situation like sticking with Villar, Sogard, Walker or getting a veteran like Howie Kendrick or Kinsler. There is something to that. I love our where our farm is sitting, and I have high hopes for the guys you mentioned (among many others). That said, we all know that most prospects don't live up to their potential, so Stearns can't make moves today in hopes that his low-level prospects are going to be stars at the MLB level on a set timetable. This is all theoretical, but if Stearns can find and acquire the "Shaw of second base," what's the downside if Huira and/or Diaz are ready in a couple of years? We'd either have a tremendous trade chip, or we'd have excellent depth when one of our infielders gets injured. Or both, we have tremendous depth in 2019 or 2020 and then trade off the "Shaw of second base" for a king's ransom right when he's hitting arby and getting expensive, allowing Huira/Diaz take over at second base. Of course, the "Shaw of second base" may not be there, in which case the best option may be between Villar or an older free agent. Stearns just seems like a guy who doesn't do the expected, but rather finds a guy no one else was thinking about. Re-signing Walker is an easy option. It's what Melvin would surely have done, and it's not a terrible idea. It's just not the way Stearns seems to operate.

I think there is little doubt that we will spend to bolster the bullpen this offseason. I think we'll probably also land a starter in either trade or free agency. If the right deal is there, I'm sure Attanasio would like to add a "big name" starter to the rotation. I just hope Stearns is able to keep him from doing something stupid. I wouldn't mind a big (by Milwaukee standards) deal for a young starter we could have through his prime years. I'd be worried about signing someone in their 30's like we continually did in the Melvin era. The good thing about having good young talent and a strong farm is that we will have a lot of good, pre-arby talent on the MLB roster for the foreseeable future, allowing us to handle a few bigger contracts... as long as we don't do something dumb like trading away all of our good prospect talent in a couple "win now" moves.

This is a huge deal in my book. The offense hasn't been great. The big question is how do you improve? One problem we have is that we have a lot of good - but not great - players. That's not a bad thing, but improving from good to great can cost a lot. I think the biggest improvement would be finding a leadoff hitter who can get on base. We have guys up and down the order who can hit home runs, but we need someone at the top of the order getting on base to be knocked in. We were at our best offensively this year when Sogard came up and played well. I don't expect him to maintain that, but if we could find someone who could, we could improve our runs scored. I know this terminology is frowned upon in today's society, but I'd like to find a good "professional hitter" for the top of the order. Someone like Sogard, but with more talent. Who knows, maybe some combo of Brinson / Phillips in CF will take on that role. If not, then 2B is the most likely spot to find someone. I would not be surprised to see Stearns pull off a Shaw-type trade where we get a young 2B at a low value point with another organization who ends up being a "surprise" for us in 2018. That seems more Stearns' style than taking the easy way out by offering a big multi-year deal to an "old guy."

We sweep the Cards and the Dodgers win at least 2 of 3. It can be done. Go Brewers! Whatever happens, it's great that we're going into the final series with a chance at the playoffs. Who would have thought that possible before the season began?

I think Garza and Walker will walk as free agents. Walker because he'll get a three-year deal somewhere, and even at $5M Garza's option won't be exercised. I'd re-sign Swarzak or a comparable late-inning reliever. I'd also look at re-signing Sogard as a LH-hitting backup middle infielder, allowing us to trade Perez. Broxton seems to be the other logical option from the MLB roster to be traded. C: Pina, Vogt - Vogt's defense is atrocious, but he's proven to be an MLB-caliber player. Bandy and Susac still haven't done that. 1B: Thames / Aguilar - I normally don't like keeping two 1B on an NL roster, but Aguilar has shown that he can hit well as a part-time player/bat off the bench which has value, and Thames can at least passably back up LF. 2B: I'm not against re-signing Walker. I'm just hesitant to sign him to a three-year deal, which he'll probably get from someone. Hoping Villar will bounce back seems risky, so I'd rather have him as a utility guy unless he earns his starting spot back. This is no doubt our biggest positional question mark going into 2018. Getting a high-OBP lead-off hitter would be ideal. SS: Arcia - I think he was brought up too early last year, but there's no doubt he's settled into the starting role going forward. 3B: Shaw - great pickup by Stearns LF: Braun - he's a Brewer for life, and he can still play... as long as he can stay healthy. CF: Brinson / Phillips with both guys getting PT at the corners when they're not starting RF: Santana - great to see him have a healthy season and prove he belongs as a starter. Rotation (until Nelson is back) Anderson, Davies, FA pickup, Woodruff/Suter, Hader I think Hader needs to get the chance to prove himself in the rotation. If he succeeds, he could be one of the best SP in the league, so he needs to get the chance. "Bullpen ace" is his fallback if he can't cut it as a starter. Woodruff is either a starter at the MLB level, or starts the year as our #1 option at AAA. Suter is a fallback option if Woodruff isn't ready. Otherwise he's a good LH option in the pen who can go multiple innings and spot start if necessary. Attanasio might want to do a major FA signing at SP, but I think it's more likely they find a solid starter to slot in at #2/3, which could make for a very solid rotation when/if Nelson returns to full form. Bullpen: I think they'll spend some money to shore up the bullpen this offseason. They'll try to re-sign Swarzak and probably another good reliever. Guerra is probably the top option for "long man" and I like Suter as mentioned above. We should start seeing some good options coming up from the farms as well, as some of our starters are converted to reliever. With the pitching talent we have on the farm, I think we should have a fully homegrown bullpen in the next couple of years. Out of necessity, they had a lot of "bullpen games" this season where the starter was only expected to go 2-4 innings. This can only work if you have a lot of bullpen arms who can go multiple innings. There will be some priority in finding guys like this, whether it's from other teams or by converting starters from our farm.

The reason I thought we could make a deal this season is that we have a lot of overall depth in the system, particularly a lot of high-level outfield depth, and there were some teams trading away pitchers who had multiple years of team control and weren't just rentals. If we could have used Brinson or Phillips, along with a few guys who are good prospects, but are farther down in our system because of all of our depth, we could have improved the MLB team without doing significant harm to the system as a whole. The Cubs upped the offer so that we would have had to include someone who was currently helping our MLB team (Hader), so it made little sense to do the deal. We likely would have done significant harm to our future without a significant net increase to the current MLB team (Quintana or Gray's production minus what we'd lose from Hader and Brinson this year). We did land Swarzak for some of our OF depth, and he has been a big help in our pennant chase without really hurting our future. This was a very shrewd move that seems to go unnoticed by those who believe we did nothing to help our playoff chances this year. I agree with those that say it doesn't have to be "rebuild" or "win now." Every move should be looked at as to how it impacts your franchise now and in the future. Some times it makes sense to extend guys, while sometimes it makes sense to trade a "proven" guy with diminishing team control for youth. Sometimes you trade away prospects and sometimes you trade for prospects. The key is to have a long-term outlook even when the short-term starts looking good. Most plans are thrown out as soon as the media and fans start screaming for short-term deals that can seriously hinder the long-term outlook. The Cubs looked like they could be dominant for a long time, but they've cut themselves off at the knees. They won't be as good next year as they are this year, and it's downhill from there as their core becomes expensive and they won't have any good pre-arby talent to keep the costs down. Meanwhile, the Cardinals will just continue to be at or near the top of the standings because they never sell the farm. I don't want us to be in a continual rebuild, I just ask that we try to model ourselves more like the Cardinals than the Cubs.

I would have loved to have traded for Quintana, and said at the time I would have traded Brinson to do so. However, in my opinion the Cubs way overpaid for him and I am glad that we backed off when the price tag got too high. I just hope the Cubs get bounced early and the horde of prospects they gave up over the past two seasons turn out to be stars so Cub fans spend the next decade lamenting that they're playing for someone else. The Cubs were in a position to dominate for a long time, and now I think they have a short window that will start closing at the end of this season.

Unbelievably the Reds are catching the Pirates, only one game back. I suspect the Bucs will unload 'Cutch and do the re-build thing. The Pirates have been interesting to me because they seem to want to follow in the "Tampa model." As has been shown in Tampa and now LA, Friedman is a genius, and it may take someone like him to run that model successfully. It sure hasn't worked in Tampa since he left. Something like the Cardinal model may be more realistic to try to emulate. First, determine the type players you are going to target. If a player fits, get him. If a player doesn't fit, trade him when his value is high. Sometimes you trade MLB players for youth, while sometimes you trade prospects for MLB players, but you never go "all in" one way or the other. Always have a strong farm so you can add good, cheap, controllable talent from the system. As you continue to win, you build a strong fan base so your TV dollars go up and you can gradually increase payroll beyond the norm for a market your size. This seems to be what they Cards have done for a long time, and it seems to be what Stearns is doing so far with the Brewers. Now, he just has to go through a full cycle (both winning and losing) and see if he continues to stick to his guns. There is a lot of pressure to dump a long-term plan and go "all in" when the team starts to win some games.