Simba2020

If he does become the everyday 1B, he might make Joey Meyer look nimble-footed in comparison.

Most draft picks don't end up amounting to much. Looking at the drafts from 1987 to 2011, for example, 9 of the 25 players drafted at #41 never even made it to the big leagues. Of those that did, probably the "best" hitter was Chris Owings and the best pitchers Sean Doolittle and Joba Chamberlain. Most of the others had very limited careers. Overall, outside of the very top of the draft, most picks are basically all lottery picks that can hit but most likely will fail. Is it worth trading a lottery pick for a guy like Claudio with a fairly reliable, albeit limited floor? Personally I would not had made the trade but based on the likelihood of the outcomes, it was probably close to a fair trade.

David Dahl inks a one year deal with the Rangers for $2.7 million. Pretty much in line with what he was expected to get in arbitration.

I don't think revenue really matters at all in the long term. Revenue goes to payroll. Revenue goes down, payroll goes down. Value doesn't necessarily change. I think you have to take off your business hat when thinking about pro sports teams. These are toys for billionaires, like luxury cars or yachts. Nobody buys a Masarati because it's a good investment. Really the 'value' of a sports franchise is whatever a buyer is willing to pay for it, and in the case of pro sports teams there is way more demand than supply. There's some value in capital (stadiums etc.) but the main reason the Milwaukee Brewers are worth twice as much as they used to be is because billionaires have doubled their net worth in the last 10 years and the number of sports team toys has remained essentially constant. Just look at what people are paying for MLS teams, which is a sports league that bleeds money There definitely is a supply and demand issue that has driven up the overall value of sports teams. However, revenues are absolutely important in determining the value of a franchise. Teams trade on a multiple of revenue for a reason. The revenue multiples aren't the same for all teams of course. Big markets like New York, Chicago and LA will have higher multiples than those in Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Cleveland and Kansas City. Owning a big market team offers greater notoriety, greater growth potential, larger pool of buyers, etc. But there is a reason that the Yankees are worth twice what the Mets are. They play in the same market both with newer stadiums. While owning the Yankees would be a bigger feather in your cap than owning the Mets, it's not worth double. The reason for the difference in value is that the Yankees produce roughly twice the annual revenues. Another way to look at it is let's assume Mark A. was willing to sell the Brewers for $1 billion. After arriving at that decision, Fox comes in and tears up the existing local TV deal and triples the carriage fees. American Family decided to kick in an extra $10 million a year in naming rights. Suddenly the Brewers revenues are up $50 million per year. Which team would you rather own? The team that generates X in revenue or the one that generates X + $50 million? I suspect we would all rather own the latter and accordingly, would be willing to pay more to do so. Thus the franchise value would go up due to the increase in revenues. Certainly Mark A. would not be willing to sell the same team for $1 billion after suddenly adding $50 million in annual revenues.

This is a good point. Got me thinkin’ on it. Thanks. Professional sports teams differ from luxury cars or yachts significantly. Unlike a yacht, baseball teams produce positive annual cash flows. In addition, most definitely not like a yacht, baseball teams have appreciated in value significantly. They may be considered a toy but owning one also serves the dual purpose of offering a great investment. I suspect if teams bled cash each year and there was no chance of the franchise appreciating in value, the number of people wanting to own these toys would dry up. They would let it be somebody else's headache.

Quoting the above one more time for emphasis. Spot on. It's very true that payroll is going to be a reflection of overall revenues. Owners do not expect or want to lose money, certainly not in the long-term. However, revenues are a main driver of franchise values. The more revenue generating capabilities for a franchise, the more it's going to be worth.

The franchise values will not go down but the equity value will decline as the balance sheets aren't in the same place as they would typically be. Plus a number of professional teams likely took on more debt further reducing the equity value.

Everyone was thrilled with the return for David Phelps. I think those guys are true wild cards. Crawford may end up better or worse than all three of those players but he is less of a wild card while probably also offering less of a ceiling. Either way, I would consider Crawford the more valuable prospect.

Baseball America had Heriberto Hernandez as the Rangers #21 prospect on their latest update, Osleivis Basabe as their #14 prospect and Alexander Ovalles wasn't rated at all. Doesn't seem like too much to give up.

Apparently the Rangers and Rays have agreed on a trade for Nate Lowe for prospects. The exact players involved are yet to be determined. Lowe would have seemed a nice fit for the Brewers. Is he somebody the Brewers could have swung a deal for?

The Reds are a mess. Still owe Votto $82 million (including buyout) the next three years. Moose was an overpay on a four year contract. They traded two elite prospects just to get out of the Homer Bailey contract. Traded for Bradley and then non-tendered him. Now this. I doubt the PTBNL will be anything significant but Reds fans can hope.

His stats away from Coors are just .248/.302/.420/.722. Not sure he'd really qualify as a superstar hitter. Injuries have probably taken a serious toll as well. Still a worthy gamble for some team at a reasonable salary.

Probably tired of his annual injury woes. Perhaps they were worried about his recovery from shoulder surgery as well.

When one of the most comparable players to him historically is Bob Uecker, that can't be a good thing.

I would agree that the Rays trading for Hader wouldn't make much sense from their point of view. Shedding money is what they are all about. Williams would be a much more likely person of interest to them. If a trade were to include Hader it would probably have to be some type of 3-team trade where Hader would end up somewhere other than Tampa.

Robinson Cano hit with a 162 game suspension for his second positive PED test. Likely Hall of Famer at one point now a twice caught cheater.

I'm not sure anyone believes Baines should be in the Hall of Fame. Probably even some of his family members were stunned by the news. With the extremely weak first-time eligible players for the HOF this year, Schilling, Bonds and Clemens have their best shots yet.

Yelich never had the look of a gold glove caliber outfielder to me. His arm strength is mediocre at best and overall just seemed like an ok defender. This year though he seemed to play at a below average level defensively. However, moving him to first would just leave a hole in the outfield without any guarantee he would be even acceptable on defense at first.

Gyorko was a savior for us last year but still probably should be only a bench player at this stage of his career. His average was under .200 the last 17 games of the year and I suspect his batting average would have continued the downward trend towards .220-.230 for a normal season. One way or another, we still need to find a regular first basemen and I don't think he was it.

Forbes basically downplayed the impact on Covid in their team valuations. Part of their justification even seemed rather bizarre. They seemed to almost justify the overall increase due to how much the Cubs have increased in value since the Ricketts bought the Cubs during the financial crisis. While true, I don't think there is any doubt that the $700 million purchase price was negatively impacted by the financial crisis. I think the same would be true today. Perhaps the Mets didn't sell at a discounted price but that is the New York market with a potential owner with the deepest pockets in the game. Not a true comparison for most teams. It would seem with the great uncertainty surrounding the sport right now, the Brewers being worth $1.2 billion is a pipe dream.

Lamb hasn't been a productive MLB player since 2017. He was released during this season. While he showed a little something with Oakland after signing with them, I'm not sure he will be guaranteed a major league contract this offseason. I'd love to see a guy like La Stella who puts the ball in play on a regular basis in a Brewers uniform. I'm also not convinced he'd be looking for the type of contract that many expect. Infielders don't seem to get huge contracts unless they are the truly elite difference makers. Don't think he qualifies. Asdrubal Cabrera was coming off of a 23 homer season and a four year stretch where he posted a .779 OPS and he got a $3.5 million contract. Followed that up in 2019 with a .783 OPS and got $2.5 million. He's older of course but did have much more of a track record than La Stella has. This might be Tommy's last shot at a bigger contract but still seems like something in the $6 to $7 million per year range would be reasonable.

Totally agree on Sanchez. Batting average of just .200 over the past three seasons with an ever increasing strikeout rate. Too expensive of a gamble for us to take a chance on. I think we are almost stuck with hoping on a Narvaez rebound coupled with non-tendering Pina. At least I think that is the most likely outcome.