UpandIn

Well...Urias may be fine at 2B, but he's much better at 2B. Maybe even elite if this years production is an indication. And the logic of saying Turang would be an elite 2B, but we don't know about Adames at 3B doesn't really track with me. 3B is the easier position. It requires less range...but sometimes more difficult throws. It actually leans into his wheelhouse and is likely where he ends up long term(if he plays long enough for his athleticism to deteriorate enough while still being productive enough offensively). And AGAIN, 3B moving forward is going to be more like playing SS in the past with the shift limited. So lefties, you'll have Adames swung over near where a SS would lineup straight away, Turang right up the middle, Urias on the edge of the grass at 2B. It is possible Adames isn't happy with it. I'm more concerned with the Brewers than Adames preferences though and he doesn't strike me as the type to throw a tantrum or sulk. I guess we just disagree on this.

Turang is a SS. An elite defensive SS. So yes, I think it'd be a "BIT" of a waste to play him at 2nd. Wong has nothing to do with this unless he's brought back next year after an abnormally bad season defensively at 2B. So...yeah, I saw it. I just don't see the relevance. Urias struggles with his throws more than anything. 2B easier throws than SS. Urias +4 OAA at 2B, -1 at 3B, -4 at SS. So I do think his defense is enough better to justify it. And if you're playing the same 3 players at 3 positions, I'm 100% indifferent to who profiles better at what position offensively. It makes literally zero difference. Seems like the only reason or reasonS you don't do this is if A-You don't think Adames can handle it. B-Because Adames doesn't want to because it could hurt his value. I don't buy either. I think he'd be an elite defender at 3B. Arguably better at 3B than SS with his arm strength.

Turang is a SS. An elite defensive SS. So yes, I think it'd be a "BIT" of a waste to play him at 2nd. Wong has nothing to do with this unless he's brought back next year after an abnormally bad season defensively at 2B. So...yeah, I saw it. I just don't see the relevance. Urias struggles with his throws more than anything. 2B easier throws than SS. Urias +4 OAA at 2B, -1 at 3B, -4 at SS. So I do think his defense is enough better to justify it. And if you're playing the same 3 players at 3 positions, I'm 100% indifferent to who profiles better at what position offensively. It makes literally zero difference. Seems like the only reason or reasonS you don't do this is if A-You don't think Adames can handle it. B-Because Adames doesn't want to because it could hurt his value. I don't buy either. I think he'd be an elite defender at 3B. Arguably better at 3B than SS with his arm strength.

This is exactly the argument. Adames and Turang are going to be starting next year(most likely). Turang at 2B is a bit of a waste of his defensive ability. Adames at 3B, especially with the new rules regarding the shift...is not a waste defensively. I also don't think you're "jerking" Adames around by asking him to move over a few feet. You field the ball, you throw the ball. It's not like you're asking a CB to switch to WRer, or asking a Catcher to move to pitcher like Carlos Marmol. This is the same team that moved Travis Shaw to 2B. Is the concern that Adames will struggle because of this? Or that Turang's not proven? Because if it's the prior, we've seen plenty of good defensive SSs move to 3B and thrive. If it's Turang, well...you always have the option of moving Adames back. I doubt he's going to forget how to play defense. You're likely going to start Urias, Adames and Turang next year in the IF. Why not line them up in the position that maximizes all of their strengths the most? Not to mention, Turang's likely our SS of the future while Adames may be traded in a year.

This is exactly the argument. Adames and Turang are going to be starting next year(most likely). Turang at 2B is a bit of a waste of his defensive ability. Adames at 3B, especially with the new rules regarding the shift...is not a waste defensively. I also don't think you're "jerking" Adames around by asking him to move over a few feet. You field the ball, you throw the ball. It's not like you're asking a CB to switch to WRer, or asking a Catcher to move to pitcher like Carlos Marmol. This is the same team that moved Travis Shaw to 2B. Is the concern that Adames will struggle because of this? Or that Turang's not proven? Because if it's the prior, we've seen plenty of good defensive SSs move to 3B and thrive. If it's Turang, well...you always have the option of moving Adames back. I doubt he's going to forget how to play defense. You're likely going to start Urias, Adames and Turang next year in the IF. Why not line them up in the position that maximizes all of their strengths the most? Not to mention, Turang's likely our SS of the future while Adames may be traded in a year.

No...we can't say that about Mitchell. Mitchell was also out 5th or 6th best prospect this past year. I feel pretty confident however that we can say that about Frelick and the farm system as a whole. You were just putting Chourio in a group just below Griffey Jr and squarely with Julio Rodriguez, Ronald Acuna Jr(pretty much anyone). I don't think we actually do need to wait before we can label it improved. We're saw a clear, obvious about face in the way we go about drafting and developing position players, PLUS we've drastically changed our entire approach to Latin America and after signing Gilbert Lara, it wasn't until 2018 we were able to get back in and start spending after a 2 year period in which we lost our bonus money for going so far over to sign him.

No...we can't say that about Mitchell. Mitchell was also out 5th or 6th best prospect this past year. I feel pretty confident however that we can say that about Frelick and the farm system as a whole. You were just putting Chourio in a group just below Griffey Jr and squarely with Julio Rodriguez, Ronald Acuna Jr(pretty much anyone). I don't think we actually do need to wait before we can label it improved. We're saw a clear, obvious about face in the way we go about drafting and developing position players, PLUS we've drastically changed our entire approach to Latin America and after signing Gilbert Lara, it wasn't until 2018 we were able to get back in and start spending after a 2 year period in which we lost our bonus money for going so far over to sign him.

Did I NOT already answer all of these questeions? Ignoring how you've reworded this in an obviously sarcastic tone ...you said To whit I responded; You also said; Last sentence; You realize that this conversation didn't start with you, right? I made a comment saying I think SOME of the trade suggestions may be a little overly ambitious on our behalf, comparing it to what SOME fans expected for Hader(two top 15 prospects for example). I listed a couple and you said that's exactly what they should get. But just for clarity real quick, Cartaya(8), Miller(26), Stone(77). That seems reasonably inline with your 1-25(#8), 1-50(#26), 50-100(#77). In fact...it's quite literally that. I agree, the Dodgers likely won't do that...which is how this conversation started. Now, YOU said that would be a fair return, but you weren't the person this comment was initially directed to. I made a general statement; And then you responded with; So I'm not sure what the debate is here, but I feel like I address all these statements. The idea that it'd be just "casual fans," who...-by the way, are the lifeblood of an MLB franchise as it takes more than a small pct of the fan base in a market as small as Milwaukee's to help generate the revenue that would allow them to push the payroll into the 140+ range- Who'd be upset with the Brewers trading Burnes...I disagree with that. I think it's a bit of an arrogant statement calling fans who don't agree with you "casual" fans. It's also, as I've said when I pointed out how the Cleveland Guardians fan base has gone from a fanbase that went from selling out every game over a 7 year period to now being 25th, ahead of only KC, Pitt, Tampa, Miami and Oakland...this depsite the fact that they won 90 games and made the playoffs with the youngest core in MLB and and having a nice stadium...as opposed to Oakland and Tampa who have terrible stadiums. And they were the only ahead of Tampa Bay in attendance and over 1.1M behind Philly in attendance, the next lowest rated team. So yes, I'd say you should PROBABLY give at least some thought to those "casual" fan base. What I DIDN'T say was that you shouldn't trade Burnes. Just that it should be taken into consideration whereas you said; This-This is the part I disagreed with and VERY clearly said; I feel like I made that point when I cited the Brewers fanbase outspending every other fan base in MLB per capita and again, object to the idea that the fans who'd be upset are "casuals." But again, NO, I did not say; I addressed this from EVERY angle and STILL never said you don't trade Burnes and I rejected the "it hurts the future of the team just so it doesn't piss off some "casual fans." Tell me what well run business ANYWHERE becomes one without a completely disregard for a teams paying customers?

Did I NOT already answer all of these questeions? Ignoring how you've reworded this in an obviously sarcastic tone ...you said To whit I responded; You also said; Last sentence; You realize that this conversation didn't start with you, right? I made a comment saying I think SOME of the trade suggestions may be a little overly ambitious on our behalf, comparing it to what SOME fans expected for Hader(two top 15 prospects for example). I listed a couple and you said that's exactly what they should get. But just for clarity real quick, Cartaya(8), Miller(26), Stone(77). That seems reasonably inline with your 1-25(#8), 1-50(#26), 50-100(#77). In fact...it's quite literally that. I agree, the Dodgers likely won't do that...which is how this conversation started. Now, YOU said that would be a fair return, but you weren't the person this comment was initially directed to. I made a general statement; And then you responded with; So I'm not sure what the debate is here, but I feel like I address all these statements. The idea that it'd be just "casual fans," who...-by the way, are the lifeblood of an MLB franchise as it takes more than a small pct of the fan base in a market as small as Milwaukee's to help generate the revenue that would allow them to push the payroll into the 140+ range- Who'd be upset with the Brewers trading Burnes...I disagree with that. I think it's a bit of an arrogant statement calling fans who don't agree with you "casual" fans. It's also, as I've said when I pointed out how the Cleveland Guardians fan base has gone from a fanbase that went from selling out every game over a 7 year period to now being 25th, ahead of only KC, Pitt, Tampa, Miami and Oakland...this depsite the fact that they won 90 games and made the playoffs with the youngest core in MLB and and having a nice stadium...as opposed to Oakland and Tampa who have terrible stadiums. And they were the only ahead of Tampa Bay in attendance and over 1.1M behind Philly in attendance, the next lowest rated team. So yes, I'd say you should PROBABLY give at least some thought to those "casual" fan base. What I DIDN'T say was that you shouldn't trade Burnes. Just that it should be taken into consideration whereas you said; This-This is the part I disagreed with and VERY clearly said; I feel like I made that point when I cited the Brewers fanbase outspending every other fan base in MLB per capita and again, object to the idea that the fans who'd be upset are "casuals." But again, NO, I did not say; I addressed this from EVERY angle and STILL never said you don't trade Burnes and I rejected the "it hurts the future of the team just so it doesn't piss off some "casual fans." Tell me what well run business ANYWHERE becomes one without a completely disregard for a teams paying customers?

I feel like we've gone in this circle a WHOLE lot. What would make it ludicrous? Do you NOT believe he can handle it? Is there any suggestion that Turang is not an elite defender, primarily at SS? So if it makes the Brewers better to go with Adames(3B), Turang(SS) and Wong/Urias(2B) then that's what you should do. As is repeatedly pointed out, the 3B will be lining up close to where the SS plays when they're straight up vs lefties. And if you're right and he'll only be here for 1-2 more years, then it makes more sense to keep Turang at his natural position, to keep Wong/Urias at positions their better suited for and sliding Adames over where he can make use of his big arm and great range. Yeah, he's a quality SS. So he'd almost certainly be a quality 3B...and it'd sold our 3B hole, particularly if Turang is able to just be a .270/.330/.380 type hitter with plus defense who can steal some bases.

I feel like we've gone in this circle a WHOLE lot. What would make it ludicrous? Do you NOT believe he can handle it? Is there any suggestion that Turang is not an elite defender, primarily at SS? So if it makes the Brewers better to go with Adames(3B), Turang(SS) and Wong/Urias(2B) then that's what you should do. As is repeatedly pointed out, the 3B will be lining up close to where the SS plays when they're straight up vs lefties. And if you're right and he'll only be here for 1-2 more years, then it makes more sense to keep Turang at his natural position, to keep Wong/Urias at positions their better suited for and sliding Adames over where he can make use of his big arm and great range. Yeah, he's a quality SS. So he'd almost certainly be a quality 3B...and it'd sold our 3B hole, particularly if Turang is able to just be a .270/.330/.380 type hitter with plus defense who can steal some bases.

They also have Small. Though Gasser doesn't count as we got back "garbage" for Hader and I'm sure if Gasser is garbage, there's no way a AA starter with a MiLB line of 3.13 ERA in 201 IP and 242Ks as he quickly moved through the farm system, but you obviously write him off after struggling for a couple months(Which is baked into those numbers). I just hate when things are so WILDLY mis-represented. This particular poster(the OP) has gone position by position and talked about both in-house options and potential trade targets. None of it means we will stop emphasizing pitching.

They also have Small. Though Gasser doesn't count as we got back "garbage" for Hader and I'm sure if Gasser is garbage, there's no way a AA starter with a MiLB line of 3.13 ERA in 201 IP and 242Ks as he quickly moved through the farm system, but you obviously write him off after struggling for a couple months(Which is baked into those numbers). I just hate when things are so WILDLY mis-represented. This particular poster(the OP) has gone position by position and talked about both in-house options and potential trade targets. None of it means we will stop emphasizing pitching.

Well, for starters, we didn't replace our GM. Second, there have been NUMEROUS threads before and after Stearns about trying to acquire a bit corner IF bat. So these articles aren't just appearing suddenly a week after Stearns stepped down as POBO. But nope...I think you're the only one who paid attention to how the Brewers played the last few years. We also missed Freddy Peralta, Ashby, Gasser(just 3 high upside pitchers in AAA or already on the MLB roster with high upside). Finally, I missed where anyone said this would be a straight up trade? Burnes for a 3B prospect? Or Burnes AND Woodruff for a 3B prospect? The article is talking about acquiring a 3B and POSSIBLE 3B targets as PART of a trade. It shouldn't need to be explained that we also need to continue to develop pitching. They also have Robert Gasser in AAA. Not that it's REALLY all that relevant. HiA, AA, AAA, what difference does it make if the goal is to develop pitchers? Is the issue that we don't have elite position prospects AND MLB ready pitchers? Who does? A couple teams. And plenty of pitchers go from HiA to AAA and we've not only got several pitchers who could do that over the next 9 months, but we'd OBVIOUSLY look to acquire pitching prospects. Also, the way Stearns acquired all that pitching was by identifying certain traits and then developing it through their pitching lab in AZ. Pitchers with good stuff who went under the radar. Like Misiorowski, Henderson, Wagoner, Woessner, Rudy. Nobody's looking at the Brewers and saying, 'well, that pitching thing didn't work out, lets just ignore that and go and get some 3B.'

Well, for starters, we didn't replace our GM. Second, there have been NUMEROUS threads before and after Stearns about trying to acquire a bit corner IF bat. So these articles aren't just appearing suddenly a week after Stearns stepped down as POBO. But nope...I think you're the only one who paid attention to how the Brewers played the last few years. We also missed Freddy Peralta, Ashby, Gasser(just 3 high upside pitchers in AAA or already on the MLB roster with high upside). Finally, I missed where anyone said this would be a straight up trade? Burnes for a 3B prospect? Or Burnes AND Woodruff for a 3B prospect? The article is talking about acquiring a 3B and POSSIBLE 3B targets as PART of a trade. It shouldn't need to be explained that we also need to continue to develop pitching. They also have Robert Gasser in AAA. Not that it's REALLY all that relevant. HiA, AA, AAA, what difference does it make if the goal is to develop pitchers? Is the issue that we don't have elite position prospects AND MLB ready pitchers? Who does? A couple teams. And plenty of pitchers go from HiA to AAA and we've not only got several pitchers who could do that over the next 9 months, but we'd OBVIOUSLY look to acquire pitching prospects. Also, the way Stearns acquired all that pitching was by identifying certain traits and then developing it through their pitching lab in AZ. Pitchers with good stuff who went under the radar. Like Misiorowski, Henderson, Wagoner, Woessner, Rudy. Nobody's looking at the Brewers and saying, 'well, that pitching thing didn't work out, lets just ignore that and go and get some 3B.'

He actually slipped mine as well. I thought Devers was part of the '25 FA class and I was going to say he MAY have more value...and then when I went to look at that class, no Devers(24) but Soto.

He actually slipped mine as well. I thought Devers was part of the '25 FA class and I was going to say he MAY have more value...and then when I went to look at that class, no Devers(24) but Soto.

Those statements are inherently at odds. They should have absolutely "zero regard" for fan reaction? Brewers fans spending more per capita than ANY other fan base in MLB is one of the things that allows the Brewers in the miniscule market they've got to spend as much as they do(cheap as you may believe Attnasio to believe, look at the Pirates, the Os, the Guardians, the As...all the other teams in similar markets), that is absolutely part of what's best for this organization. Look at the Guardians. I remember how they had this ridiculous sellout record goin...it was like 588 days(I don't remember, it's a long list). They've really hurt their relationship with their fan base. Some of that may just be fans complacent with 90 win seasons and some of the luster having worn off on that, but they also don't develop connections with the players as they once did. I'm not saying you don't trade Burnes and Woodruff, but maintaining a good relationship with your fanbase is absolutely relevant and important. I'm talking about deals like Grayson Rodriguez and Jackson Holliday or Bobby Miller, Vargas, Stone and Pepiot or Cartaya. I'm not going after anyone's trade suggestions because I've suggested pretty much that Dodgers trade(it's actually my favorite in theory, a 1B prospect and then 3 power righties who are MLB ready. One who could plug into the rotation and then 2 more who could also slide into the rotation or who could come in and throw 2-3-4 innings out of the pen. I just think we're are probably expecting a little bit too much back. Sure, we're in the sweet spot in theory. Though maybe you run into a team like Seattle that's desperate for a playoff run for their fanbase(Baltimore) or the LAA start out, they get hot this year and they're a pitcher away from contending...and they're willing to pay more to get that ace. I also think we SHOULD expect a kings ransom because Burnes is so valuable. Juan Soto says hi! I'm thinking he slipped your mind...or maybe you disagree? Not really important as the larger point is that Burnes has immense value. Walker Buehler is an example of this if you throw in injury with regression. Buehler was in a class right with Burnes just last year. 6.6 WAR vs 5.6. Now I saw someone propose a trade of Adames and Burnes that included Buehler and someone said there was "no point" in adding Buehler. While I don't agree with that, it shows how quickly a player can lose value. That said, if Burnes stays healthy, I'm not sure you can quantify how much value he loses. I don't know if it's 50% because he's got 50% less service time....why? Because...as pointed out, the game isn't played on paper. Teams get desperate. Again, just the two teams I mentioned...or maybe the Twins who've been getting more and more aggressive. The Jays might be a team that's got this dominant lineup but lacking an ace. The point I'm making is that I understand both sides of this. Part of me wants to trade Burnes now and I'd be more than happy to get back....4 pitchers with elite stuff. Try and identify the next Steven Strider(Which may be someone like Bobby Miller) and a couple other elite arms. But; This isn't true if it gets the Brewer to the World Series or wins them a World Series. I don't think there is a significant difference in trade value from trading him this winter vs this deadline, so maybe see how things play out. Lets say...hypothetically, Frelick/Turang looks like a .280.360/.420 type hitter with elite defense, maybe Yelich comes back and he gets hot and spends the off-seasons working on his core, his back, he gets a little bit of that bat speed back and he hads some loft to the ball again(his exit velo(90%) and hard hit rate(98%) have both been exceptional, just mostly on the ground). Maybe Uribe becomes a Emanuel Clase, Peralta gets back to his 2021 status, it clicks for Ashby and HE becomes a legitimate #2/3 pitcher. Lauer throws 180IP and does so at a high level, Houser stays healthy. Adames doesn't have the abnormally low BABIP and he retains the power without the fluke, career low BA/OBP. I don't disagree with anyone in this thread and this is a case where no matter what we do(unlike with the Packers today) I'll understand whatever they move and the rationale for it. But it's just a bit more complicated and nuanced, and we should look at it from other teams perspectives. If you're Texas, do you really want to give up Jung, Carter, Lieter and Foscue? It's gonna be a very difficult decision and you're gonna piss of fans and you're going take a risk either way. Lets just extend him and render the whole discussion as moot! (This is like half blue).

Those statements are inherently at odds. They should have absolutely "zero regard" for fan reaction? Brewers fans spending more per capita than ANY other fan base in MLB is one of the things that allows the Brewers in the miniscule market they've got to spend as much as they do(cheap as you may believe Attnasio to believe, look at the Pirates, the Os, the Guardians, the As...all the other teams in similar markets), that is absolutely part of what's best for this organization. Look at the Guardians. I remember how they had this ridiculous sellout record goin...it was like 588 days(I don't remember, it's a long list). They've really hurt their relationship with their fan base. Some of that may just be fans complacent with 90 win seasons and some of the luster having worn off on that, but they also don't develop connections with the players as they once did. I'm not saying you don't trade Burnes and Woodruff, but maintaining a good relationship with your fanbase is absolutely relevant and important. I'm talking about deals like Grayson Rodriguez and Jackson Holliday or Bobby Miller, Vargas, Stone and Pepiot or Cartaya. I'm not going after anyone's trade suggestions because I've suggested pretty much that Dodgers trade(it's actually my favorite in theory, a 1B prospect and then 3 power righties who are MLB ready. One who could plug into the rotation and then 2 more who could also slide into the rotation or who could come in and throw 2-3-4 innings out of the pen. I just think we're are probably expecting a little bit too much back. Sure, we're in the sweet spot in theory. Though maybe you run into a team like Seattle that's desperate for a playoff run for their fanbase(Baltimore) or the LAA start out, they get hot this year and they're a pitcher away from contending...and they're willing to pay more to get that ace. I also think we SHOULD expect a kings ransom because Burnes is so valuable. Juan Soto says hi! I'm thinking he slipped your mind...or maybe you disagree? Not really important as the larger point is that Burnes has immense value. Walker Buehler is an example of this if you throw in injury with regression. Buehler was in a class right with Burnes just last year. 6.6 WAR vs 5.6. Now I saw someone propose a trade of Adames and Burnes that included Buehler and someone said there was "no point" in adding Buehler. While I don't agree with that, it shows how quickly a player can lose value. That said, if Burnes stays healthy, I'm not sure you can quantify how much value he loses. I don't know if it's 50% because he's got 50% less service time....why? Because...as pointed out, the game isn't played on paper. Teams get desperate. Again, just the two teams I mentioned...or maybe the Twins who've been getting more and more aggressive. The Jays might be a team that's got this dominant lineup but lacking an ace. The point I'm making is that I understand both sides of this. Part of me wants to trade Burnes now and I'd be more than happy to get back....4 pitchers with elite stuff. Try and identify the next Steven Strider(Which may be someone like Bobby Miller) and a couple other elite arms. But; This isn't true if it gets the Brewer to the World Series or wins them a World Series. I don't think there is a significant difference in trade value from trading him this winter vs this deadline, so maybe see how things play out. Lets say...hypothetically, Frelick/Turang looks like a .280.360/.420 type hitter with elite defense, maybe Yelich comes back and he gets hot and spends the off-seasons working on his core, his back, he gets a little bit of that bat speed back and he hads some loft to the ball again(his exit velo(90%) and hard hit rate(98%) have both been exceptional, just mostly on the ground). Maybe Uribe becomes a Emanuel Clase, Peralta gets back to his 2021 status, it clicks for Ashby and HE becomes a legitimate #2/3 pitcher. Lauer throws 180IP and does so at a high level, Houser stays healthy. Adames doesn't have the abnormally low BABIP and he retains the power without the fluke, career low BA/OBP. I don't disagree with anyone in this thread and this is a case where no matter what we do(unlike with the Packers today) I'll understand whatever they move and the rationale for it. But it's just a bit more complicated and nuanced, and we should look at it from other teams perspectives. If you're Texas, do you really want to give up Jung, Carter, Lieter and Foscue? It's gonna be a very difficult decision and you're gonna piss of fans and you're going take a risk either way. Lets just extend him and render the whole discussion as moot! (This is like half blue).

LOL...what are you talking about? Excuse for who? Who am I meant to be "defending" or excusing for anything? They traded two stars and got back what appears to be a terrible package thus far. Strider just threw 94 IP last year('21) and struck out 153, so guessing the Braves weren't trading him(regardless of where he was ranked on whatever list you're going off). Harris was their future CFer and top prospect after Pache had lost most of his deal. Pache had gone from a top ~10 overall prospect to ~80 to not in the top 100 as he'd been terrible the first couple years in ATL. Basically Lewis Brinson, a catcher/LFer with a 40 hit tool and 35 speed and very little else. For Matt Olson -Ryan Cusik +7ERA in AA -Joey Estes 4.55 ERA in HiA(A's 13th ranked prospect) -Christian Pache -.6 WAR(-1.4 for his career) -Langeliers-The one prospect who looks decent. Same for Chapman. They got back...what, -1.5 WAR and nobody ranked in the top 100. Kirby Smart(28) -.7 WAR, Kevin Smith(26) .3 WAR .180/.216/.302 for a whopping .516 OPS Zach Lowe(26) -1.1 War Hoglund-Who's thrown 8 innings of professional baseball, all this year. What "excuse" do I need to make? What part of what I said isn't true? They traded two GG corner IFers who had 2 years left of team control, two players who'd gotten MVP votes and got maybe one player back who looks like he could/maybe be a contributor this year...and HE put up a .218/.261/.430 line in 40 games. That's the BEST looking player they got back for those two stars. Did YOU make these trades? Is there some reason why you find this to be a personal affront to you?

Yeah, I'm starting to wonder if maybe we're doing what some fans did with Hader. I got into a Twitter debate with a fan at the start of this season in which he stated we'd get "at least 4 top 100 prospects" back for Hader. I don't think 4 top 100 or 150 prospects is expecting too much for Burnes, but a lot of us are naturally just looking at teams who appear to be likely invested in getting an ace and picking 3 or 4 of their top 5-10 prospects. A team would have to be pretty desperate. And that may well happen, but if it doesn't, we should just hold onto them.

Yeah, I'm starting to wonder if maybe we're doing what some fans did with Hader. I got into a Twitter debate with a fan at the start of this season in which he stated we'd get "at least 4 top 100 prospects" back for Hader. I don't think 4 top 100 or 150 prospects is expecting too much for Burnes, but a lot of us are naturally just looking at teams who appear to be likely invested in getting an ace and picking 3 or 4 of their top 5-10 prospects. A team would have to be pretty desperate. And that may well happen, but if it doesn't, we should just hold onto them.

I doubt they will...and they should get more back than Chapman or Olson. Atlanta's farm system had been emptied out with young players filling up their MLB roster.

They're a 100 loss team and I don't expect they think that's going to change. So the question is which is going to be more valuable at the trade deadline? A guy who plays good(but not great) defense and carries a walk rate of ~5% or a reliever who throws in the upper 90s with nasty stuff? At least with one you could get a nice prospect back. I just don't see much value to Taylor.

Taylor is a perfect example of where I think the trade value is skewed. He's a good defensive CFer who's going to be 29 years old, is coming off his best season, walked fewer than 5% of the time, strikes out a lot...and he's got a little power, but he's a rotational OFer at best. Puk has the stuff to be a high leverage reliever. I think WAR undervalues relievers. I think the A's could and would wise to trade Puk for younger prospects with more upside. I don't really know what Taylor gets them. On a side note, is any team in baseball in worse shape right now than Oakland? They are getting NOTHING back from their Chapman/Olson trades. They've got a terrible farm system, their MLB roster is devoid of talent. They have not made a lot of great moves recently. The Luzardo trade being one that was particularly bad at the time and doesn't look any better in retrospect.