Brewcrew82

I'm not saying they're not elite starting pitchers or an elite top of the rotation. I'm just saying that they don't quite match up to those teams, which is validated by the statistical comparison below. Since 2020: Burnes and Woodruff: 822.1 IP, 2.72 ERA, 2.70 FIP, 2.86 xFIP, 31.85 K%, 25.55 K-BB% 24.6 fWAR Wheeler and Nola: 894.1 IP, 3.31 ERA, 2.89 FIP, 3.04 xFIP, 28.25 K%, 23.05 K-BB%, 25.9 fWAR DeGrom and Scherzer: 616.1 IP, 2.33 ERA, 2.37 FIP, 2.56 xFIP, 37.35 K%, 32.4 K-BB% 21.3 fWAR Urias and Kershaw: 716 IP, 2.72 ERA, 3.17 FIP, 3.40 xFIP, 26.5 K%, 21.45 K-BB%, 17.9 fWAR

I'm not saying they're not elite starting pitchers or an elite top of the rotation. I'm just saying that they don't quite match up to those teams, which is validated by the statistical comparison below. Since 2020: Burnes and Woodruff: 822.1 IP, 2.72 ERA, 2.70 FIP, 2.86 xFIP, 31.85 K%, 25.55 K-BB% 24.6 fWAR Wheeler and Nola: 894.1 IP, 3.31 ERA, 2.89 FIP, 3.04 xFIP, 28.25 K%, 23.05 K-BB%, 25.9 fWAR DeGrom and Scherzer: 616.1 IP, 2.33 ERA, 2.37 FIP, 2.56 xFIP, 37.35 K%, 32.4 K-BB% 21.3 fWAR Urias and Kershaw: 716 IP, 2.72 ERA, 3.17 FIP, 3.40 xFIP, 26.5 K%, 21.45 K-BB%, 17.9 fWAR

Yes, But these rosters are completely different. Our strength right now is by far our starting pitching. Take that away and we have little else to fall back on ATM. A Burnes/Woodruff trade, in which you eat away at our major strength, wouldn't win us more games this year without major outside additions, which is a huge ask with our limited resources.

Yes, But these rosters are completely different. Our strength right now is by far our starting pitching. Take that away and we have little else to fall back on ATM. A Burnes/Woodruff trade, in which you eat away at our major strength, wouldn't win us more games this year without major outside additions, which is a huge ask with our limited resources.

I was talking about the last three years. You don't become among the best in the game based on one season.

I was talking about the last three years. You don't become among the best in the game based on one season.

Not even the Dodgers. They have Urias, who doesn't quite have the rate stats of Burnes and Woodruff, and Gonsolin, who doesn't have the rate stats nor the innings.

Not even the Dodgers. They have Urias, who doesn't quite have the rate stats of Burnes and Woodruff, and Gonsolin, who doesn't have the rate stats nor the innings.

Burnes has been the best starter in baseball since 2020. No one has numbers across the board as good as him and over as many innings as him in that time frame. He's in the "bucket of buckets" with DeGrom (when healthy) and probably Scherzer. Woodruff is in the "bucket" after that, and even then there's only 5-8 guys in it at most with him (Wheeler, Nola, Cole, etc.). So, yes, other than the Mets and Phillies, no other team can match that kind of quality at the top of the rotation. Certainly not the Cardinals, who are our primary competition in the NL Central.

Burnes has been the best starter in baseball since 2020. No one has numbers across the board as good as him and over as many innings as him in that time frame. He's in the "bucket of buckets" with DeGrom (when healthy) and probably Scherzer. Woodruff is in the "bucket" after that, and even then there's only 5-8 guys in it at most with him (Wheeler, Nola, Cole, etc.). So, yes, other than the Mets and Phillies, no other team can match that kind of quality at the top of the rotation. Certainly not the Cardinals, who are our primary competition in the NL Central.

I mean, anything they get for one of those guys is almost certainly going to be in unproven prospect capital, which would come in addition to the several rookies that they'll have to rely on next season. Unless they immediately go out and trade for/sign SEVERAL proven players (i.e., Jansen, Abreu, etc.), which we should be highly skeptical of due to our limited resources, they would a lot like the 2022 Diamondbacks. What separates us from most teams in the league is the Burnes-Woodruff 1-2 punch at the top of the rotation, which gives us 2 of the best 5 or 10 pitchers in the world. Take that away, and we're very average to below average elsewhere. Given that we only won 86 games this season WITH those guys, saying we would be lucky to win 85 games without one or both of them isn't "silly", it's reality.

I mean, anything they get for one of those guys is almost certainly going to be in unproven prospect capital, which would come in addition to the several rookies that they'll have to rely on next season. Unless they immediately go out and trade for/sign SEVERAL proven players (i.e., Jansen, Abreu, etc.), which we should be highly skeptical of due to our limited resources, they would a lot like the 2022 Diamondbacks. What separates us from most teams in the league is the Burnes-Woodruff 1-2 punch at the top of the rotation, which gives us 2 of the best 5 or 10 pitchers in the world. Take that away, and we're very average to below average elsewhere. Given that we only won 86 games this season WITH those guys, saying we would be lucky to win 85 games without one or both of them isn't "silly", it's reality.

This is still the most likely scenario, imo. Everything that Stearns has said about "bringing back the core" and "competing" indicates this. Without Burnes and/or Woodruff, they'll be lucky to win more than 85 games. With both of them, they have a shot to win 95. Extend one of them (probably Woodruff) this offseason and then trade the other next offseason for a still significant haul.

This is still the most likely scenario, imo. Everything that Stearns has said about "bringing back the core" and "competing" indicates this. Without Burnes and/or Woodruff, they'll be lucky to win more than 85 games. With both of them, they have a shot to win 95. Extend one of them (probably Woodruff) this offseason and then trade the other next offseason for a still significant haul.

Interesting. My guess is that they sign one of Burnes or Woodruff (probably Woodruff) to an extension this offseason, in the mold of the recent Castillo and Musgrove deals. Besides the fact that it is so hard to develop elite starting pitching in the first place, they might feel the need to do so given the huge hit they took from the fanbase after the Hader trade. They would get absolutely excoriated for trading Hader, Burnes, and Woodruff in successive years.

Contreras isn't coming to Milwaukee. Nor would I want him to.

Contreras isn't coming to Milwaukee. Nor would I want him to.

Yeah, there's no point to the Brewers acquiring Buehler as he's currently on the mend from TJ surgery, will become a FA at the same time as Burnes, and has shown diminished skills recently. This is a straight-up rebuild, no doubt about it. Which conflicts with every statement Stearns has made.

Yeah, I just don't know if the value is there. Wouldn't bring much more power than Urias either considering Urias has hit more homers in a single season than Urshela. And Urias has more team control than Urshela. Granted, Urias isn't the one being traded and could be moved to 2B, but then you're limiting Turang's playing time. I think we can probably make better use of our resources. Renfroe may be needed to guard against the inevitable growing pains from our rookie OFs.

It's not really an improvement at 3B considering Urias also put up a 3.1 bWAR this season....Also, Renfroe isn't really preventing our young outfielders from getting playing time. They're going to want Yelich to get more at-bats at DH as his defense is hurting his value, which leaves LF and CF open for Frelick, Mitchell, and co. If anything, Renfroe provides valuable insurance in the OF against the inevitable rookie growing pains.

Again, why would the Brewers sign Benintendi, when A) he would almost certainly cost more than Renfroe who you're non-tendering and B) when they have Frelick who is basically a cheaper, faster version of him. Frelick in RF, as you have it, doesn't work either as his arm is mediocre. You say Suter can make a spot-start, but he hasn't done so in almost two years. He's the definition of a low-leverage, replacement-level reliever (-0.2 fWAR) who the Brewers could replace internally at a fraction of the $3 million cost. For someone who wants to create payroll flexibility, to the extent that he is determined to non-tender Renfroe, that is completely non-sensical. Moreover, his age and underlying numbers from this past season indicate (4.40 FIP) that he is due to suffer further decline. As for Vasquez and Caratini, their value was nearly identical by fWAR, with Vasquez just barely edging out Caratini. And their underlying numbers were also virtually identical. Caratini was slightly better at framing per baseball savant, while Vasquez was slightly better per fangraphs. Definitely doesn't justify a $5.0 Mil. difference in their salaries. Feliciano is not going to be the back-up C. Your back-up catcher actually has to be respectable defensively. Feliciano is nowhere near respectable defensively ATM.

I highlighted this in my updated payroll blueprint, but I think Adames to the Dodgers for Vargas and Pepiot makes a lot of sense for both sides. For the Brewers, it finally provides you with your 1B of the future, and a high contact one at that, while Pepiot gives Stearns the increased pitching depth that he talked about in his season-ending press conference. Turang takes over at SS for Adames, which is his natural position. For the Dodgers, they are substituting what they paid for Turner over the last two years with Adames' last two years of arbitration, and for similar production. I likewise think they're going to be hesitant to dip into the elite FA SS market, including Turner, with all of the other holes they will have to address on their roster, especially on the pitching side of things. I think their main focus is going to be on the FA contingent of DeGrom, Rodon, Verlander, Diaz, and Judge. They need ace postseason pitchers/relievers and a big outfield bat to pair with Betts.

We can argue about Houser and Hiura to the A's all day long. Fact is, that trade isn't a central element of my plan. If it came down to it, we could just go ahead and trade them to a different non-contending team for a reliever and a utility player. I will note that the A's still need to field a ballclub at the MLB level and that all of their moves aren't going to exclusively be acquiring minor league talent. Houser is an above average starting pitcher that they have room to feature at the big-league level. Same with Hiura. They have the ability to give him the playing time that we simply don't have against RHP. You emphasize that neither would be around when the A's field their next competitive team, well, doesn't the same logic apply to Puk and Kemp, given how weak the A's currently are on talent at the MLB and minor-league levels? The upside is that, if Houser and Hiura produce in their roles, they can be used to net more prospect capital. It's a risk that a rebuilding team like the A's can afford to take for barely over $1 million dollars. As for Kemp, I was more focused on matching salaries with Houser and acquiring a left-handed bench bat to replace Peterson. I'm sure the Brewers would attempt to get him to consider increasing his positional flexibility to SS and 3B as the price of playing for a contender. Meanwhile, with respect to the Dodgers, they do have significant payroll flexibility this offseason. But, again, they have decidedly more holes on their roster right now than they are accustomed to having, especially on the pitching side of things. They WILL NOT be able to resolve all of them in the FA market. Some will have to be addressed via trade. My assumption, based in part on the outcome of the Padres series, is that they will be heavily invested in the elite starter and reliever FA market (DeGrom, Rodon, Kershaw, Diaz, etc.) as well as the OF market (Judge?). Which could make them particularly open to acquiring a SS like Adames for a reduced cost similar to what they were paying Trea Turner over the past year and a half. Especially when the production gap btw. Adames and the elite FA SS is relatively small. They would have to part with some prospects, but Vargas is looking like he's blocked by Freeman and Pepiot is overshadowed by Stone and Miller. It's a deal that could end up making perfect sense for both sides. Certainly, a heck of a lot more sense than non-tendering Renfroe, while signing Benintendi for a greater cost and retaining Suter and Houser.

I wanted to strike the best balance between going for it next season and optimizing our future, which seems to be the direction Stearns. and co. are likely to take. This roster strikes that balance, imo. Gives them one year to attempt to extend Burnes/Woodruff, while eliminating Adames as an extension candidate. I love the guy, but his profile is simply too risky in light of the Yelich deal.

Yes, the Dodgers are well into the luxury tax, but the further you venture into it, the greater the penalties are. Which is why it acts as a de-facto salary "cap". The Dodgers have multiple holes that they need to address this offseason, particularly on the pitching side of things. Thus, they could easily prefer a lower-cost option at SS such as Adames who already produces on a level that is similar to those FAs. They would essentially be replacing Turner's salary over the past two years with Adames over the next two years, which would then enable them to use their resources t'o attack the pitching market (i.e., DeGrom, Rodon, Diaz, etc.). Meanwhile, Vargas is looking more and more like a first-baseman, where he is blocked for the foreseeable future by Freeman. I wouldn't say that Houser and Hiura "don't make any sense" for Oakland. Kemp and Houser is essentially a salary swap and provides them with an above average starting pitching option that they can eventually flip to a contender. I think Houser would perform very well in that ballpark. As for Hiura and Puk, Hiura does cost slightly more and has one less year of control, but that is roughly offset by the fact that Hiura is a position player and Puk is strictly a reliever. Oakland could be very tempted to see what Hiura can do in regular playing time, which, unlike the Brewers, they can provide, and the possibility of flipping him for prospects. Yes, Oakland would be paying about $1.3 million more, but they certainly have the payroll flexibility to take that chance, when Puk isn't likely to play a role on their next contender anyways. Regardless, it certainly makes a heck of a lot more sense than the Brewers non-tendering Renfroe, keeping Suter and Houser, and then going out and signing Benintendi for even more than Renfroe and despite the presence of 4 MLB-ready outfielders.