UpandIn

This makes very little sense to me. It's one thing to keep a guy down for a couple weeks to gain an extra year of service time. It's another to keep a guy down who projects to be one of your best players for the first 5 months just in case he fits into what at the moment is a poorly designed incentive for draft picks. You have to be willing to bet on him winning a ROY award(or top 3 finish) in order to be willing to forgo the extra year. So why does that translate to the trade deadline? Carroll, Walker, Alvarez, Cavilli, Perez, Painter, there are a LOT of extremely talented rookies. They could also start him on the OD roster, see how he's playing. I don't think it's either OD or after the trade deadline though. That feels...hyperbolic.

They usually play the 162 games over 186 days I believe. 171 days or fewer is less than 1 year of service time. So a couple weeks. Or you send them down for a couple weeks at some point(which can be tough with a guy like Frelick if he starts out hot).

Oh...silly me. I could have SWORN you were talking about them relying on too many rookies rather than a literal chronological order or when the rookies arrived(in which case, he'd STILL only be behind Mitchell if I understand how...counting works). LOL...why are you so angry? You argued he hadn't spent enough time in the minors. Then you jumped into this thread(if feels like under multiple names) and played the victim without being mentioned...and why? Because people came up with a LOOOONG list of players who spent little time in AAA...including Brewers. But sure, "he should be an upgrade and in the lineup," is ABSOLUTELY the same as "the first player ever elected to the Hall of Fame before he retires." Just...take a breath bud.

They really don't ALL need to align. He's 29 and has a career line of ~.270/.375/.465. Just an average year from Winker and not his worst year would be a needle mover. And in his worst year, he STILL put up a .344 OBP.

I love how you think this has turned into ANYTHING about YOU or...really anything even tangentially about YOU and nobody has said you "hate" Frelick(mostly because people just don't care enough). In fact, it's really difficult to follow the logic in your posts. It went from someone who wasn't as high on Frelick to you jumping in with...this; Unprompted; Brewcrew82 And then you...not addressing the point AT ALL; So the GIANT fact was that you were "blasted" for not "anointing" Frelick as the ROY next year(which was never the argument, the argument was that he could finish top 3 in ROY...which is what you need to get draft pick compensation). Also, there's not some new "BE about how that's not what you meant." It's REAL simple what he he's saying. Frelick's one of the top candidates for ROY. Ergo, there's a strong chance he'll be on the OD roster. The only two reasons he WOULDN'T would be because they want that extra year of service time...which would mean leaving him in the minors for about 6 weeks so he has less than 172 days of service time. This was explained...probably 3, 4 times. Or if he's injured. Otherwise, he obviously should be on the roster. FINE!!! You're under the impression despite almost literally EVERY top prospect who has spent very little time at AAA once they play well there because...it's generally a level for older minor leaguers who are waiting for a callup and a place top prospects spend very little time means Frelick won't be a part of the plans for the everyday lineup and if he is...they might as well trade Burnes, Woodruff and Adames(that's logical and not hyperbolic). He's also CLEARLY not the 3rd rookie, he'd be the #1 rookie given the 70 hit tool and the dominance at the higher levels, the things Flanigan has said about him as a prospect(ya know, the guy in charge of overseeing prospect development). But here's the point...it's not that you DON'T think he'll be in the lineup...it's that you KEEP whining about it and making these claims that people will "blast you" for not saying he'll be ROY, an argument not one single person has made. And I'm sure all you'll get for this is "why do you hate Sal Frelick," so that was probably just a waste of time.

I don't have a problem with that, but just to play devils advocate; Turner is likely going to get 10-15M a year...even if it's just a year or two...I also still don't see him leaving LA. So not sure he's a real option. Also, looking a little more at Donaldson's defensive metrics, he was +6 OAA last year at 3rd, Turner was -2 and Turner has reverse splits(still hit lefties more than well enough to be a good fit). Now...IF the Yankees are looking to move off Donaldson and eat most of the deal, I think that might be a better or at least more realistic option. You would be hoping for a offensive bounce back from him, but he's just a year removed from a .943 OPS vs LHPing.

I love the defensive upgrades. I this is an ELITE lineup vs right handed pitchers. But we are absolutely brutal at this point vs lefties. We need to bring in at least 1 or 2 guys who can be the weak side of the platoon. I'm great with banking on Turang, Frelick...little less so with Mitchell, but his defense and his speed lower his floor. But are we going to be counting on Ruiz, Wiemer, Perkins, somebody at catcher who can hit lefties? Because we were bad last year and as I pointed out, we're losing 3 of our top 4 hitters vs lefties, including the only guy who had an OPS over ~.750 vs lefties in Renfroe. Winkler is a great bet on a bounce back. I did see one comment that made me scratch my head. That Winkler takes Renfroe's place as the clubhouse douche now? Never heard anyone say anything negative about Renfroe, but...whatever. If the Brewers can get lucky and Ruiz and Wiemer are ready and can hit lefties or just we as a team somehow find out a way to get better vs lefties, with the young players, speed, the contact, maybe Toro helps vs lefties and fulfills his potential as well. If those things happen, I could see us getting back to the 95-100 win team we were in '21. But those are some pretty big risks. The Yankees are looking to dump Josh Donaldson...who definitely IS a clown. And also very near the end. But they're reportedly willing to eat most of the contract in order to move him. I wonder if that's something we may consider? He wasn't good last year, but if the Yankees are eating 12M, he could get time at 1B/3B, Urias could kick over to 2B vs lefties or he's just a DH/1B? Still got plenty of glove for 1B. Just a thought if it's a very low risk deal in which the Yanks are looking to move a guy for a lotto ticket type return to open up 3B.

Prepare to hear how important AAA games are for elite prospects who continually get better on a year to year basis and how they need more AAA games despite an enormous list of prospect(including virtually every good prospect we've brought up in the last ~20 years and the top hitters in baseball) having played very little or now AAA ball...and many having played fewer games at AA as well. Also, the premise isn't even a good one. Frelick's Defense; How did Kwan put up 5.5 WAR last year? He hits for less power and is a worse fielder?

I REALLY hope not. We really will need to be able to hit left handed pitching at some point. Winkler would be perfect...if he was a right handed hitter.

Or Juan Soto, or Ryan Braun, or Albert Pujols, Or JJ Hardy or...MOST great players. Hiura is a particularly strange counter-point. So he came up, half a season, hit 19 HRs, hit over .300 with an OPS of ~.940. So it took a year for his being rushed to catch up to him? There is no point in keeping prospects in the minor for some arbitrary # of games that you believe to be significant. I think Soto had ~20 games above rookie ball. Kwan had even fewer games and is about as similar a player as you can get to Frelick(since I'm sure you'll get hung up on the Soto thing and suggest someone is claiming Frelick=Soto). He had 77 games in AA and AAA. There are a LOT of top prospects who skip levels or go straight from AA to MLB. Why? Because...again, no point in keeping a guy with an 1.100 OPS or a .365 BA in AAA when he can help your team just for the sake of more ABs.

I think that may have been part of the rationale behind Perkins. Really good vs lefties the last two years, can play all 3 OF positions. I doubt they're banking on him on the opening day, but he's a low risk signing and if he can just be a platoon player, he could have value. Maybe Ruiz fits in and they think more of him than we do. Or maybe there's some Willy Adames type trade we make but instead of a young arm, it's a 5 tool OFer like Mitchell. Turang can at least hit lefties well for a lefty. Wong had a OPS in the .400s last year. Also...Willy was a ~.280/.360 hitter for the Brewers in '21. Just that version of him for a full season would be huge. Though he too had reverse splits. Perhaps they'll trade Wong, try and shore up the catching position with Contreras...who knows at this point. That's unlikely, but they clearly have other moved planned. They have to if the plan is to "build around Burnes and Woodruff." It'd also be great if Wiemer stayed healthy and was a breakout star next year for us. He still has such a wide range of outcomes, I wouldn't be surprised if was a middle of the order hitter for us by next August.

Ok...so he was BETTER at AAA. Explain why that's a negative? And he played 6 fewer games at AAA than he did at AA(52 games) and he played less than 40 games at HiA. And he had a high BABIP....at all 3 levels, so it's not like he was lucky. He had an elite hit tool when we drafted him. He had a 7% K rate. He's ready. It's obvious he's ready. The only reason he wouldn't be in the OD roster would be due to service time or injury. "check themselves?" Are they in danger of wrecking themselves? Also, the person you quoted...very specifically said he expected Wiemer to make the 2024 Opening day roster and that he should make his debut at SOME point next year. So his inclusion here makes little sense.

I was simply using Chourio as an example. I don't think a K rate of 27% if it comes with a BB rate of 14% playing the most difficult position to develop is really a concern. Especially if that same player is putting up a .290 and .225 ISO slugging and hitting for as much power as Cartaya. Gunnar, Volpe, Gunnar, Elle De la Cruz, they all had high K rates with lower BB rates than Cartaya...and few hit for the same type of power. The 40 man thing is also...really really minor when talking about a prospect of that caliber. Even the Dodgers have guys on their 40 man that they could do without. Johnny DeLuca for example. A 25th round pick who's not among their top 30 prospects...who hasn't done anything particularly impressive and has a handful of games above HiA and will be 25 next year. But I also never suggested we trade for Cartaya. I just pointed out he wasn't among their top 30 prospects when I posted that link. For starters because...I'd just prefer to get arms back and the Dodgers have made it pretty clear they don't want to trade him after the Nats trade...and then their reluctance to include him this year in a deal for Soto. So if they did trade him, it'd likely be a 1 for 1 trade and I'd rather the Brewers get back a pitching prospect or 2. But I'm not sure they'd even include him in a trade unless it was for Woodruff or Burnes.

Vargas and then...they've got so many pitching prospects with big ceilings but you're probably right about Miller. Stone was a guy that they're supposedly very high on based on their reluctance to include him in a trade last deadline. Vargas plus any of the 3 would probably be a good deal. I just wonder if the Dodgers would do THAT deal. Vargas is a guy people think will contend for batting titles in the future. He can play 3B(*NOT well, but he can apparently play it) and he's cheap. For a team that would have had a payroll over 300 last year if not for Bauer's suspension, seems like they'd be better served to sign a FA and then keep the cheap young studs. But maybe they want to stay below the luxury tax line for a year to reset the penalties.

He's showing up again now, but when I posted this, Miller was #1 and I didn't see Cartaya on the list. I figured it was a mistake, but I thought maybe he'd been involved in some trade or...something. I've never seen him play, so I have no idea if he's overrated defensively. His defensive grades are good, 60 arm, 55 field, but a lot of passed balls and a lot pct of caught stealing. The strikeouts don't seem like they should be all that concerning. a 14% walk rate and a 27% K rate? Especially for a guy with a ~.300 ISO? Those seem...pretty reasonable. Compared to Chourio(for example) who had a similar K rate and half the BB rate...assuming a jump to 40% seems a little fatalistic. His K rate didn't jump when he went up to HiA, but his power and BB rate did. Obviously AA is a bigger jump, but...it was also his age 20 season. I won't argue with you on Quero though. I have seem him play and outside of walk rate, he looks like a pretty safe bet to be a solid MLB catcher if not more. He looks quick, we all saw how well he did in the AZF League. I thought he should be a top 100...and I suspect he will by next year. Meanwhile Dominguez almost couldn't be accurately rated. I've seen a lot of different comps for him, but MLB Pipeline uses Trout, Mantle and Bo Jackson. That is just...insane. But that's how it goes for Yankees prospects. When have they not been overrated? Maybe the Dodgers as well, but their prospects seem to hit more often.

Fair enough...they all get some credit. But I don't know how you pick out the team that he actually developed broke through with, become the best in MLB at what he does and say THAT team doesn't get credit for developing him. Jimmy Nelson is another guy who was ascending and if not an ace yet, was on the verge of becoming an ace. Whatever they're doing, that infrastructure should still be in place as Stearns obviously hasn't left yet, so it's not as though we're losing personnel.

Yeah, that's true. It's also just good to know. Maybe they don't reach an agreement and the Dodgers like him enough...AND need a CFer. Mitchell+Adames for Vargas/Miller plus...a couple of those power arms could make sense for both sides. Adds that big RHed bat, a potential TOR arm while the Dodgers saved 35M this year on Turner or Correa(which would destroy that fan base) and with Bellinger getting non-tendered, Mitchell would be a good fit in CF for them. The trade favors the Dodgers on the ever holy Trade Value Simulator, so they throw in Bruns or Knack...or both. The fans are are always...ridiculously undervaluing the return...probably in the same way I'm suggesting they give up two guys who will probably play huge roles for the next 6 years for cheap for Adames and Mitchell. Two elite prospects. I'm sure the wouldn't be what most of us want or that Friedman(or hopefully Arnold) uses that site. The Dodgers always find a way to keep the legit studs off limits while trading the Kiebert Ruiz rather than Cartaya or Bobby Miller as the Dodgers found out when they got hosed for Scherzer and two years of Turner. I am a little curious why Cartaya is no longer listed as their #1 prospect. Must be a mistake on MLB pipeline; https://www.mlb.com/prospects/dodgers/

I don't think you trade him with Burnes and call it a wash. First, I'd just write the 28M in deferred money to a sunk cost. I don't think a team is going to take that on. Second, not this year, but if he has another 3 WAR season next year, I'd agree to send ~40M with him in a deal, at which point a team would be paying roughly 5 years and 110M, 70M with the Brewers eating 40M of that money. At that point, his contract is more like Aaron Hicks, but he's a much better hitter. Then...maybe you can get out from a big chunk of that money and you'd have young players who could step in, play the OF, they'd be cheap and...MAYBE if a team was desperate you could make a trade. Not real likely, but also '22 Yelich isn't quite the albatross he's painted as. Especially as the shift should help him as much as just about anyone. Best case is he can get up to ~280/.370/.400 with the limited shift, be a valuable hitter atop the order and we just....live with it. Worst case is his back gets worse and we're stuck eating the whole contract and he's in and out of the lineup. So not much different than '21. The deal made a lot of sense, just...didn't work out. Kinda like the guy who won the MVP after him, Cody Bellinger...who the Dodgers had also tried to lock up. Just bad luck. I don't think it was the knee, I think it was the back, but whatever it is, he hits the ball hard still...just on the ground and to the right side of the IF. So again, hopefully the new rules benefit him.

I don't think you trade him with Burnes and call it a wash. First, I'd just write the 28M in deferred money to a sunk cost. I don't think a team is going to take that on. Second, not this year, but if he has another 3 WAR season next year, I'd agree to send ~40M with him in a deal, at which point a team would be paying roughly 5 years and 110M, 70M with the Brewers eating 40M of that money. At that point, his contract is more like Aaron Hicks, but he's a much better hitter. Then...maybe you can get out from a big chunk of that money and you'd have young players who could step in, play the OF, they'd be cheap and...MAYBE if a team was desperate you could make a trade. Not real likely, but also '22 Yelich isn't quite the albatross he's painted as. Especially as the shift should help him as much as just about anyone. Best case is he can get up to ~280/.370/.400 with the limited shift, be a valuable hitter atop the order and we just....live with it. Worst case is his back gets worse and we're stuck eating the whole contract and he's in and out of the lineup. So not much different than '21. The deal made a lot of sense, just...didn't work out. Kinda like the guy who won the MVP after him, Cody Bellinger...who the Dodgers had also tried to lock up. Just bad luck. I don't think it was the knee, I think it was the back, but whatever it is, he hits the ball hard still...just on the ground and to the right side of the IF. So again, hopefully the new rules benefit him.

What do you consider developing a pitcher then? Hader had spent a little time in AA for Houston. He got to Milwaukee, his K's kept going up, two years later he was the 33rd ranked prospect in one top 100, 38 in MLB Pipeline(he wasn't top 100 before the trade). Phillips and Santana were the top two prospects in that trade. Houser had thrown 33 innings above HiA. So who did develop Hader? The Orioles? The Astros? Or the team that spent the most time with him and turned him into a top 40 prospect? "Developing" a pitcher is a lot more than simply drafting him. It's...well, developing him into a MLB pitcher. With Lauer, they had him throw his slider about 11% more and his 4 seamer about 11% less... By the logic you're using, did we develop Peralta? We didn't draft him...at what point does the team that got him to the Majors get credit for developing him? Example...if Makenzie Gore breaks out and becomes an ace with the Nats, I'd consider them having developed him...particularly given his struggles, not the Padres who rode his raw talent and then didn't help him make the adjustments. Corey Knebel is another guy. We got him to change the way he pitched...he became an elite late inning reliever.

What do you consider developing a pitcher then? Hader had spent a little time in AA for Houston. He got to Milwaukee, his K's kept going up, two years later he was the 33rd ranked prospect in one top 100, 38 in MLB Pipeline(he wasn't top 100 before the trade). Phillips and Santana were the top two prospects in that trade. Houser had thrown 33 innings above HiA. So who did develop Hader? The Orioles? The Astros? Or the team that spent the most time with him and turned him into a top 40 prospect? "Developing" a pitcher is a lot more than simply drafting him. It's...well, developing him into a MLB pitcher. With Lauer, they had him throw his slider about 11% more and his 4 seamer about 11% less... By the logic you're using, did we develop Peralta? We didn't draft him...at what point does the team that got him to the Majors get credit for developing him? Example...if Makenzie Gore breaks out and becomes an ace with the Nats, I'd consider them having developed him...particularly given his struggles, not the Padres who rode his raw talent and then didn't help him make the adjustments. Corey Knebel is another guy. We got him to change the way he pitched...he became an elite late inning reliever.

Yeah...you're right. It's not possible the Brewers who are trading Renfroe and possibly Wong could afford a 1B projected to get ~15M a year(which would STILL leave them with a lower payroll than last year). I really thought you had more insight than this...I'm starting to realize, you don't really offer any insight.

Yeah...you're right. It's not possible the Brewers who are trading Renfroe and possibly Wong could afford a 1B projected to get ~15M a year(which would STILL leave them with a lower payroll than last year). I really thought you had more insight than this...I'm starting to realize, you don't really offer any insight.

I'd probably hold out and ask for another lower rated arm or two. Bruns, Kopp, Knack...a couple lower rated prospects with big velocity but other issues...usually command that's kinda holding them back.

Why does "everyone" on this board act like "everyone" makes these statements that aren't remotely true? The overwhelming majority of the Burnes/Woodruff discussion has been centered around IF either would sign for comparable deals. Woodruff->Luis Castillo and Burnes in the deGrom 5/135 range. Who has said that it's just up to the Brewers if players sign extensions? In fact I'd guess the majority of people have said it's unlikely either would sign an extension at this point. Same with Abreu. We know three things now about Abreu with regard to free agency. His preference was to stay in Chicago. He is "a top priority for the Padres." And he wants to continue to play 1B. I don't know how the numbers work out to 1% chance that he signs with the Brewers or what that's based off, but it's kinda silly. Maybe "everyone" should just stop speaking for "everyone?"