monty57

Brosseau hits lefties and we need guys who can hit lefties. Barring further moves, I think his spot on the roster should be safe.

It seems almost impossible to believe, but Cots says Taylor is in his final pre-arby year. I would've thought he was well into arby. Although he didn't perform well when given the opportunity to start last season, he has proven himself to be a valuable 4th OF. I think his experience will be important this year, and the Brewers would need to get a lot of excess value for them to trade him. With the plethora of young OF in the system, he'll eventually get traded, but I think that's a year or two from now. He'll still play a big role for the Brewers in '23. Hiura on the other hand doesn't have a place on the team. I really thought he should get more playing time last year to see what he could do. That they didn't give him a bigger role last year seems to show that they don't have a lot of faith in him, and therefore he should be traded away. Honestly, I was shocked they offered him arby, guaranteeing that they'd owe him a couple million. Regardless of whether we had acquired Anderson, I thought Hiura had to go. I think the acquisition of Anderson mostly affects the rookies. Prior to his acquisition, it really looked like we could be starting three rookies on opening day (Mitchell, Frelick and Turang). Now I think that one of those three will start the year in AAA. My choice would be Turang. He may deserve to be promoted, but with the economics of baseball, it isn't always that simple. He'll play for the Brewers in '23, but I think he'll be in Nashville long enough to "buy" another year of service time. Meanwhile, we can hope that Frelick and Mitchell play well enough to be in the top three for Rookie of the Year. That will obviously help the team win games, plus it could get them an extra draft pick or two.

Yes, Brosseau will definitely be on the roster. Can't believe I forgot about him. I think it'll be almost a straight platoon at 3B with Anderson/Brosseau. Both are righties, but Brosseau hits lefties a lot better than Anderson.

A lot comes down to how much the Brewers are going to utilize their MLB-ready prospects. I think the acquisition of Anderson probably means they'll start two rookies instead of three. I think Frelick will be up with Turang down. Since Anderson is a 3B who can play some corner OF, and Frelick is considered a better prospect than Turang, I would think that Frelick will be the guy up. Plus, Turang is a natural SS who has spent time at 2B, and Urias is a natural 2B who has been forced to play 3B, so why not just keep the better prospect up and let the players man the positions they're best at (Anderson 3B, Urias 2B, Frelick OF)? Mitchell, Yelich, Frelick, Taylor as the four OF (Taylor the 4th OF, not a starter) Tellez (1B), Urias (2B), Adames (SS), Anderson (3B), Contreras (C) as your starting IF. I still think Hiura should be traded, but if not, then he gets a bench spot along with Caratini and probably Toro/Miller as the utility guys.

This will be Turang's 23-year-old season, so if the team keeps him down a while, they gain control of his 29-year-old season, which for most players is one of their best years. If he's just an average MLB SS, that would be a fairly expensive year on the free agent market. As I said, I have no problem with him being on the opening day roster as a starter. I just don't want to lose a season of his prime for him to be a 23-year-old utility player getting around 300 PAs (Peterson had 328 last year). To me, that isn't a good trade off. If he's not a starter, then have him start the season in AAA. As to the extension, you won't find a bigger proponent of early extensions than me. However, many/most players won't sign them at the rate the Brewers would offer, so you can't just expect that the Brewers could just automatically ink an extension if he has a good rookie season. Plus, the price of the extension would go down if he has a year of extra "team control." There really is no reason to have him on the opening day roster in a bench role. Give that spot to someone like Toro or Miller.

In his two top years, Winker's wRC+ was in the 140's. That would put him in the Julio Rodriguez/Juan Soto/Pete Alonzo range. If he does that, I doubt the Brewers trade him. It would, however, go a long ways to getting us the division title and hopefully a good run in the playoffs. As to Turang, I'm fine if he starts, and I'm fine if he's held down to gain a year's service time. The only scenario I don't want to see is him taking on "the Jace Peterson role" as a utility guy off the bench. That would not be worth making him a free agent a year early, losing a year's service time when he's in his prime. To the guy in the title of this thread, I don't see a problem with him starting at 3B, probably getting some bench time in favor of Brosseau when a lefty is on the mound. He plays decent defense at the position and there's plenty of reason to believe that he could be a good bat again. If not, then he's served his purpose by buying us another year of Turang's service when he gets called up and Anderson gets relegated to bench duty or DFA'd. For one of the cheapest free agents signed this offseason, we have become a better team than we were before the signing. Urias gets to move to his natural position, Adames stays at SS, Anderson/Brosseau man the hot corner with Toro/Miller as the utility IF. We (hopefully) start Mitchell and Frelick in the OF, and now we don't have to start three rookies from day one.

I would refer you to Exhibit A: Carlos Correa. He will have a physical, but on a one-year / $3.5M (plus incentives) deal, it won't be looked at quite as closely as Correa's.

Opening day is still a ways away, but this move seems to point to Turang starting the year at AAA to save a year's service time. He's our "replacement in waiting" for SS when Adames is gone, so it isn't a bad idea to preserve an extra year at the position where he provides the most value. 3B/OF isn't your typical utility guy, so Anderson doesn't really fit that role. I guess that he will be the opening day 3B, with Urias moving to 2B where he's been a better fielder and should be the most valuable. The OF flexibility is nice, in that Counsell likes to pinch-hit, so there will be situations where Anderson will shift to OF after someone gets pinch-hit for. Plus, it allows them to only have four OF (Yelich, Frelick, Mitchell, Taylor) on the roster. Urias came up as a 2B, and is below-average defensively at 3B. Turang is a natural SS who hasn't played much 3B. It will be nice to have an actual third baseman playing 3B on a regular basis. I just hope that his bat bounces back. It's a $3.5M signing, so you can't expect too much "needle moving," but this move makes sense. On a one-year deal, there isn't much risk.

That's a pretty good compilation of "Brewers' most valuable assets." Put another way, if the Brewers traded for a prospect of Chourio's level for someone like Winker, Tellez, Lauer or Houser, Arnold would immediately go down in GM folklore. Heck, if he could trade Tellez for someone on Frelick's level he'd do it in a heartbeat without regard to the 2022 first base situation. It's also kind of funny that Urias, the guy so many people are clamoring to replace, is one of our most valuable assets. I'd prefer he play second base, but he's not someone we should be looking to turn into a utility infielder.

Ha. I hope we didn’t trade for a guy who’s career consists of 11 plate appearances at La Moyne College.

Agree. If we were to sign one, I would set my sights on Woodruff. But honestly, I don't think we'll extend any of them, and I think that if we do, it won't be long before the "how can we get out of this contract" talks would start. Burnes' contract will be in the $40-50M annual salary range, so he's out of the discussion. Adames was so-so with the Rays (couldn't hit at Tropicana), had a good partial season once traded to the Brewers, and had 4.7 Fangraphs WAR season in '22, but still ended with an OBP under .300. If he wasn't a Brewer but was a free agent, I doubt people would be clamoring to sign him to a long-term deal for $20-$30M/season. That leaves Woodruff, who would be great to sign if we could get him for a couple of his free agent years. My concern is that he'll be 31, and will know that it will be his one chance to sign a big money deal. He'll probably want 4-6 years of free agency bought out, and I think that's too risky for the Brewers. A four-year ('23-'26) deal would be perfect, and could fit nicely into a couple of years where they have a lot of pre-arby guys and could afford Woodruff and Yelich on big-money deals, after which guys like Frelick, Mitchell, etc will start getting more expensive.

Agree. If we were to sign one, I would set my sights on Woodruff. But honestly, I don't think we'll extend any of them, and I think that if we do, it won't be long before the "how can we get out of this contract" talks would start. Burnes' contract will be in the $40-50M annual salary range, so he's out of the discussion. Adames was so-so with the Rays (couldn't hit at Tropicana), had a good partial season once traded to the Brewers, and had 4.7 Fangraphs WAR season in '22, but still ended with an OBP under .300. If he wasn't a Brewer but was a free agent, I doubt people would be clamoring to sign him to a long-term deal for $20-$30M/season. That leaves Woodruff, who would be great to sign if we could get him for a couple of his free agent years. My concern is that he'll be 31, and will know that it will be his one chance to sign a big money deal. He'll probably want 4-6 years of free agency bought out, and I think that's too risky for the Brewers. A four-year ('23-'26) deal would be perfect, and could fit nicely into a couple of years where they have a lot of pre-arby guys and could afford Woodruff and Yelich on big-money deals, after which guys like Frelick, Mitchell, etc will start getting more expensive.

I'm not a fan of signing extensions to players once they're already in their arby years, as it's basically a free agent deal (very little discount) and the Brewers can't build their roster on long-term free agent contracts. If they are to do one, I think it should be to a game-changer, like Braun and Yelich were when they signed. I think Adames is a fine player, but he's a guy who will get a few All-Star appearances, not a guy who is regularly vying for MVP titles. Even if we didn't play in an economic structure that is slanted against us, I'd have to think long and hard about an Adames extension. He has had an up-and-down career, and his replacement is already in-house and MLB ready. Even if the contract were smaller, I think the best bet is to let Adames play for the Brewers this year, and trade him away after the season for a nice group of young players with a lot of team control, letting Turang take over SS in '24. If we're looking at anything close to $300M, there is no way the Brewers should consider it. I'd be hesitant to give that to Burnes, and he's far more worthy of that contract.

I'm not a fan of signing extensions to players once they're already in their arby years, as it's basically a free agent deal (very little discount) and the Brewers can't build their roster on long-term free agent contracts. If they are to do one, I think it should be to a game-changer, like Braun and Yelich were when they signed. I think Adames is a fine player, but he's a guy who will get a few All-Star appearances, not a guy who is regularly vying for MVP titles. Even if we didn't play in an economic structure that is slanted against us, I'd have to think long and hard about an Adames extension. He has had an up-and-down career, and his replacement is already in-house and MLB ready. Even if the contract were smaller, I think the best bet is to let Adames play for the Brewers this year, and trade him away after the season for a nice group of young players with a lot of team control, letting Turang take over SS in '24. If we're looking at anything close to $300M, there is no way the Brewers should consider it. I'd be hesitant to give that to Burnes, and he's far more worthy of that contract.

Right, which is why he did not sign the contract. The Brewers need to be disciplined, and it appears they have been. As @Robocaller said, these deals should only be done if the player takes a significant discount. I said that the Brewers should offer these deals to all of our good pre-arby guys. I understand that many of these guys will not sign them. Some players will see the benefit of signing a guaranteed extension for a discount, others will want to maximize their earnings by going year-to-year. Early extensions are just one tool for the Brewers to use. They aren’t a panacea. But, they are an important tool for small revenue teams to try to keep players for an extra year or two and control their cost in a world where they can’t compete with the big markets in free agency.

If Hiura had signed the Peralta deal, he’d be making $2.25M this year, which is probably what the Brewers will owe him after agreeing to arby, and would be guaranteed about $10.5M over the next three years. Even if the players don’t work out, the deal still isn’t going to hurt too much. There’s risk in anything they do. If they stick to the math, and only sign the guys who will agree to their deal, they can control the risk. That Hiura, Villar, and Hall didn’t sign means that the Brewers do stick to their guns. If they player demands more, then no extension is done. We have not regretted any of the early extensions we’ve done. We have regretted most of the late extensions we’ve done.

I want to add to this that successful early extensions greatly improve trade value. Woodruff is undoubtedly a better pitcher than Peralta, but according to Baseball Trade Values, Woodruff's value is 50.5. while Peralta is 63.8. Woodruff will be 30 next year, has 4.161 years of service time, is a free agent in '25, and is expected to get $13.25M in '23. Peralta turns 27 next June, has 4.09 years of service time, will not be a free agent until '27 (per Fangraphs, Cots has him a FA in '26, but I think Fangraphs is right), and will make $3.735M in '23. Both of these guys have nearly the same service time, but we could field of guys on Peralta's contract for around $97M, while Woodruff's final arby year will be close to $20M, and Peralta will still be under "team control" for two years after Woodruff hits free agency. How are these deals bad for the Brewers, and why shouldn't we be offering them to Contreras, Frelick, Mitchell, Turang, and every other good prospect shortly after they hit the majors? Even if half of the prospects flamed out, we would still "win" if all of them accepted. Of course they all won't accept, at which point we will know who will be long-term pieces, and who are "year-to-year" guys who won't be extended.

Not only did it move quickly, the Mets blew the expected price range for free agents through the roof, then the other teams with extra money to spend followed suit, pushing prices up on everyone. All the other rich owners have to be trying to decide what they're going to do if Cohen and the Mets do this again next year. If they decide to compete with the Mets if they do it again, the Brewers' days of signing free agents will be history. I thought we'd make a push for a "setup guy," but at this point, I'm not sure. I'm glad we have young depth for the 'pen, but would like another "proven" arm or two for the back-end of the 'pen.

I look at it as transferring risk, much like the insurance industry. The team is assuming the injury/bad play risk, so the player has to accept less money than they may get if they maintained the risk and went year-to-year. Risk transfer has been calculated by insurance companies since the days of Columbus and Magellan, and they do pretty well with it. Well run baseball organizations can as well, as long as they stick to their math. To me, there is no reason for a team to sign an extension in the arby/pre-arby years unless the player agrees to a substantial discount. The farther out from free agency, the deeper the discount. This is essentially the player "paying his premiums" for the transferring of risk to the team. Once a player gets into their arby years (where Burnes, Woodruff and Adames currently sit), the team is basically signing a free agent deal with very limited discount. The Brewers can't live in this arena, at least for their star players. They should try to extend every good pre-arby player they can to a discounted deal that gives them 1-2 extra years of service time. These are the Asnby/Peralta/Lucroy/Braun (first deal) type of deals. There is risk that the player doesn't pan out. But, let's say Ashby is never better than a middle reliever. With his contract, he won't be that overpaid as a veteran middle reliever, and he certainly won't be the main reason the Brewers can't make other moves. Even if he completely flames out, the team won't be that bad off. If a player opts to go year-to-year rather than accepting the early (discounted) extension, that's fine. It's their right to do so, and they are maintaining most of the risk. The Brewers need to accept that they are year-to-year players, and they shouldn't grow too attached. Trade them when it makes the most sense, which will normally be around 1-2 years prior to their hitting free agency. It's a business. "Math nerds" are taking over the front offices, and from their standpoint early extensions should be very appealing.

I get what you're saying, and making sure fans continue to buy tickets is always a consideration. That said, any team that makes it's decisions based on appeasing the "casual fan" is not going to be a successful organization. With the guys they have, they are still long-shots to win it all. Keeping them to "go for it" one more year doesn't assure them anything... they might not even make the playoffs. We don't have the resources to quickly rebuild the major league team through free agency. Losing the potential guys we could get in trade would lead to a long downturn, and would be a fatal error by Brewer management. The fan base will be fine as they see the newly acquired players putting up all-star seasons for half a decade while Burnes is playing out a $40M+/year contract. At the end of the day, it is "the name on the front of the shirt" that fans cheer for. Shortsighted fans will be upset by the trades, but the good thing about shortsighted fans is that they will remain shortsighted, and will be happy when the new guys start playing well. Trading Lucroy and Gomez allowed the Brewers to turn things around much more quickly than most thought possible. No one is bemoaning the fact that we didn't extend Lucroy and Gomez. Trading Burnes, Woodruff and Adames will be what allows us to continue on as a playoff team for years to come instead of taking one long-shot chance and then suffering through a rebuild. Then the following year we'll trade Peralta, and so on. Extending players early in their career and trading them before they hit free agency is the way for a team like the Brewers to remain "continually competitive." Fans will get used to it, or they'll migrate to a big market team that doesn't have to operate under the constraints put on the Brewers.

Since they extended Peralta and Ashby, I would assume they made similar offers to other players as well. The further along a player's pre-arby/arby schedule a player gets, the less "team friendly" the deal gets, so I fully expect them to make offers to most, if not all, of their talented young, pre-arby guys soon. Contreras would be included in this. Some of them will see the value in guaranteeing life-altering money, while others will choose to take some risk and go year-to-year in an attempt to maximize their earnings. The Brewers will have to act accordingly. In our current case, that means they get some extra time with Peralta (who accepted the offer), while trading away Burnes and Woodruff who went year-to-year. 2023 should be a fun year watching the loaded rotation, along with what will hopefully be an improved lineup. It will also be a year where some guys who will be "core" players for the next half-decade get some much needed experience, as they'll be heavily relied upon after Burnes, Woodruff, Adames, Lauer, etc are traded away prior to 2024. I'm excited to watch this year, and I'm also excited to see what we'll receive in trade after the year is done that will hopefully build our future playoff rosters. In his short tenure, I think that Arnold has shown the willingness to trade, and some aptitude in getting a good deal. We'll need that moving forward.

I just hate the idea of taking the guy who is far-and-away our best IF prospect and sitting him on the bench. Either let him start, or let him play everyday in AAA. I get that we all like him more than Miller or Toro. That's why he needs to get everyday PAs. Bringing him up as a backup would waste his service time and probably hurt his development relative to letting him start in either AAA or MLB. Let Toro or Miller ride the pine and get a handful of PAs per week while being paid league minimum. That's a good use of their pre-arby "cheap years," while it would be a waste of Turang's.

Agree, which is why it’s nice to have Taylor around. He’s proven to be a quality backup, so hold him until he’s forced off the roster.

I figure Yelich will be the DH next year (‘24). so that might give us some time with Mitchell, Frelick, Wiemer as starters until Chourio is up for good. That could mean that Taylor could still be the backup. How all the guys progress and get promoted should determine Taylor’s fate. He’s not going to block any of them, but if someone’s going to just sit the bench, I’d rather it be him, with Wiemer playing every day in AAA. If Chourio and Wiemer come up sooner, Taylor will be gone sooner.

Yeah, "prospect" is a pretty broad net. There's a big difference between "The Brewers acquire a prospect" and "The Brewers acquire a Top 10 prospect." When I see the first, I'm assuming it's a "for cash considerations" deal. When I see the second, I clear the calendar because I know I'm going to be spending all night reading up on the deal. Everyone in the minors is a prospect. Few will ever play on a MLB field. But, as I've said a couple of times recently, even guys who play for a few pre-arby seasons are valuable additions, especially to a small revenue team like the Brewers. We need 26 men on the roster, so if someone like Lutz (since he's been brought up) can man a backup OF spot for a season or two at league minimum and save us from spending a few million on a veteran, it's something.