BrewerFan

1-Sure, check with all of them. They watch him more than Casually, BUT...the little I watched, he looked pretty fluid and comfortable there. He wasn't firing the ball over there like Machado 8 feet into foul territory, but he certainly looked like he could approximate Monasterio's defense. But this observation is kinda like someone who watches parts of ~10 Bucks games and then tells you how a players shot looks. 2-Wiemer has generally struggled to adjust to the next level. It's not an issue of bat speed. Not even sure it's an issue of recognition. He has a high effort swing, he's a little overly aggressive IMO. I think he'll be fine, but there's probably a ceiling on his BA. I'd like to see him back in the OF to start next year...but since there are not enough spots, start him in AAA, call him up when you have a need. 3-NOTHING highlighted this more than his bases loaded at bat in game 1 that could have helped blow that game open(immediately before the Tyrone Taylor LD Double Play). He just looked like he was taking bad, defensive swings. 96, 96, 97, but little movement and all in the same location. I've repeatedly said he reminds me of Trea Turner(a poor mans Turner, but a similar type of player) and I would not give up on him yet. I'm not even close to giving up on him. I think he's still got a 3-5 year .265/350/.425 peak in him. A 15/30 type guy. But man, he looked SO far away from that this year, so I understand why people are more inclined to give up on him.

Especially when we're talking about trading Burnes, Adames(some have talked about Devin Williams) and Woodruff's status is up in the air. That's pretty much all the Brewers can count on. And it's not just Black and Wilken, it's one of the best farm systems in Baseball. Also...I understand prospects fail, they're busts ALL the time. That's why you get them for nearly 7 years of team control. The alternative is what exactly? Trading for proven young players? Why would a team that actually wants Burnes and is a contender want to do that though? Is AZ ever going to trade a Corbin Carroll for a guy with one year of team control? Obviously not. You suggested a player like Yelich IIRC? The Yelich we traded for who was ~27 and had 3 years of team control but not a superstar, just a really good 4-5 WAR player. Again, why would a team that's trading him away want Burnes? The Brewers aren't putting all their eggs in the Wilken/Black basket. They have a lot of other young talent...but they're also both young players who were highly regarded who have done nothing but hit since they've been drafted. And we'll have half a dozen players right behind them in Boeve, Adams, Bitonti, Pratt, Baez...Devanney is already in AAA, has a great glove and hit well in AAA. There is no way to build a WS team in Milwaukee without draft and develop(or sign and develop)...which is why what David Stearns did in re-building(and actually just building) a Dominican club was so incredibly important.

Yeah, they are in the worst position of any team in the division. They might still be better than the Bears, but that's just worse for them. They don't have much cap room, Cousins is a FA, Hunter a FA. So...I feel like he's just trying to talk a little while he still can...and might as well let him. Hey, they do have a GREAT WRer....who will probably get ~35M a year. Kinda like living in a trailer and having a Bugatti in the driveway, but at least they've got that!

I can't think of a team that'd both do that and want to trade for one year of Corbin Burnes. They're at cross purposes....which is why there is a pretty standard formula here. I guess if I was pressed, I'd say you could argue for a Braves trade that includes Michael Harris II type player. The problem there is he has SO much more value than Burnes, you'd have to start adding prospects to send back to the Braves. That's assuming they'd even consider a trade like that. But moving closer to someone who's been really good, that type of production, has ~3 years of team control left...I couldn't come up with a name. To be fair, I haven't spent too much time looking for one, so perhaps someone else could, but I'm just of the opinion you shouldn't worry about 2024 and take a micro view, this trade should be made by looking at what's best for the Brewers through 2030 rather than 2024 and their immediate needs. A position not all posters hold. I also think the Brewers can be confident their Minor League System is strong and choose to add to it. It allows for them to be more need driven perhaps rather than just taking back the BPA. They can target certain young arms. Or maybe they won't even do that, I don't know. But prospects with nearly 7 years of team control are so valuable, they don't all have to end up on the field for us. I'd also argue the best way to get a top farm system and then more importantly, maintain it is by making these type of moves. Really just adding talent through the three main options available. LA, MLB draft, trading star players they can't afford.

Ok...my mistake. I see what you were saying. He's a healthy, 28 year old pitcher who led the NL in Whip, 2nd in BAA, 5th in ERA and he's got a Cy Young recently, relatively few innings. When(if) a team trades for him, how is he going to be described? "____acquire Cy Young winner Corbin Burnes." But I guess how he's described is less important than the return...which hopefully brings back at least one high ceiling arm in the upper levels and a couple more in the lower levels.

Yeah, that'd be idea. If you're targeting pitching, you might only get one top 100 and then 2 more who are younger, high ceiling arms who are further away. I'm fine with that as well. Definitely not someone just to plug a hole for next year or a guy who has 3 years left and we're just going to find ourselves looking to trade him in 2 years(hopefully as we're getting ready to compete again) because we...don't want to lose that player for nothing. If Philly gets close and doesn't win again, they may be the team that's the most likely to give up a lot for Burnes/Williams. Hopefully they have a BP meltdown. Also...I just really hope it's not AZ and Philly in the NLCS as that's just gonna be hard to stomach.

I don't know that I'm replying to you specifically, but if you wanted Arcia back as piece of the Adames trade...then sure. You're not the only one who's brought him up or others have complained about him. And the options are in no way Turang/Monasterio OR Arica. So Arcia has two years of team control. I don't think the Braves would feel like there's much excess value, we know him, he's not much(if any) of an upgrade on what we have, he has two years of team control left, 1 more than Adames and the Braves had arguably the best lineup in MLB History this past season and they can bring every player back next year. So I don't see them being all that motivated to swap out their worst hitter for Adames and give up much prospect value. I remember someone say if we're going to actually be competitive, we can't just spend the off-season, "plugging dikes." Wish I remember who it was, but they were right. We're trading Burnes, we're trading Adames...but in those trades or any trades, we have to make CERTAIN that we have a guy who put up a 1.6 WAR this year(same as Turang, .3 better than Monasterio in ~200 fewer ABs)? Getting back less prospects or controllable talent so we can get a one year insurance policy whilst also trading Burnes, Adames(maybe not having Woodruff)...what is the goal there? 80 wins instead of 78? So to answer your question(pretending to accept the premise is true that it's an either or)...no, I'd rather go with the two guys who were rookies this year than to play around the fringes while we trade away a Cy Young pitcher, our power hitting SS and our other TOR arm possibly spends a good chunk of next year coming back from a shoulder injury. At the very least, his future is in the air at this point. Again, I'd trade for the best young controllable talent I could get for Burnes, Adames, Williams if there is a market for him that makes it make sense, and look at '25 as a more likely starting point to try and return to being a competitive team, hopefully with 3-4 more young guys who are either part of the team or on their way.

It was Gasser for Goldschmidt and Burnes traded to pay for Goldy. I just cannot wrap my head around that approach. If you're gonna add Goldy, trade for him, but then one year of a power hitting 1B, you may as well keep Burnes. This balancing where you are adding some offense and taking away some pitching...and in this case, you're also trading the most likely replacement for Burnes. But I've even seen Arcia(who has 1 year left) as a suggestion for an Adames trade. Feels like half measures.

No reason to. That's the name of the Stadium where the Brewers play...and if you tell me otherwise, I will plug my ears and make childish sounds.

Of course you wouldn't. When does a team trade a Cy Young winning pitcher in his prime and get back a prospect who's going to immediately approximate his value that next season? If that's the standard, you're never going to be happy with the return. An arm like Frasso or Stone could easily be plugged into the rotation for the next nearly 7 years, and you likely get a couple lower level fliers back as well. There's also Bobby Miller, Pepiot...though I doubt we get either back.

Ok...I'm not speculating on rumors and this thread is...fairly easy to follow;

And there's still no reason to agree to that on Woodruff's side. The Brewers get him locked in at what he'd make either way(the very minimum of what he'd make) and he gets...what he'd get either way? That really doesn't make sense unless you get a buyout and then I'm pretty sure you can't decline the option and make a QO. The upside for Woodruff doesn't change but the downside changes massively.

You have to at least see what is available. It's just not lining up with Burnes, Woodruff, Peralta and then the next core. If you can get a guy like Painter from Philly for Burnes and Williams, I'd take that and two young guys who are fliers My thinking is pretty simple. This era of the Brewers is over and we're quickly coming up on the next one, it's not going to overlap, we can pretty much see that now. This was also the impetus for me suggesting another move that I've said from the jump was VERY unlikely to happen, but it's pretty simple. What's the best chance to win a WS? A dynamic offense with Chourio, Contreras, Quero(both or you trade one), Frelick, Wilken, Black, Mitchell, Turang and Wiemer(I still believe both are going to be 3-4 WAR players Wiemer could be significantly higher at his peak). At the same time here, you've got another pretty significant wave of talent coming through that at least as of now is pretty highly regarded. So looking forward and I feel like we're pretty well set up offensively, we're pretty well set up with our BP, and guys will always step up in both places, but especially the Bullpen. The rotation is the question mark. Gasser, Rodriguez both look like really good #3/4 starters. Peralta is a #2/3 on a WS caliber team. Ashby has Ace upside, but the dreaded shoulder. Misiorowski has deGrom like potential, but so clearly has a very low floor as well. So I'm just in favor at this point of a clean slate and doing what we can to add to an elite farm system. That was the impetus for another trade proposal I suggested while stating it was incredibly unlikely. But I don't want this tepid BS. Don't try and appease the fans so you can sell 2.4M tickets. You'll sell tickets if you have a great team and if you've got a 40/70 player and you've got a stacked lineup(and even more so if you sign him early in his career so you know he's there through his 20s). I think moving to the next chapter is the better move and as much of a clean slate(while adding as many assets) as possible is the best way to go.

Ok, you're talking about the likelihood he's productive again. He's talking about his earning potential. Unless non-tendering him is on the table, then lets say he misses the entire '24 season due to surgery. What do you think he'd get as a FA? Is it more or less than 5M dollars for a former Ace coming off a shoulder injury? I think we could agree it'd be well over 5M for a team like the Dodgers or...whomever. So 2/20 is probably not worth it for Woodruff at this point. You'd need at least 2/28 to thread the needle most likely. We'll see 1st if he needs surgery as I haven't heard thus far that he will. Exactly. Surgery, a full year off and he'd still safely get 10M.

I gave this a thumbs up...because I agree! I give a thumbs down if I disagree. It's not much more than that. I tend to post a lot. Others aren't as vocal. I'd prefer(usually) if you expanded on your opinion, but...if people don't want to, so be it.

I'm not taking a shot at the Bears...but is anyone Bears level bad at developing QBs outside of Cleveland? They're particularly bad. As for AZ, just 13M in dead cap, but more importantly, they'd save cap space. ~5M and they'd be almost 75M under the cap. Arizona gets to start over and trade Murray. Plus, he's a pretty good young QB, though AZ will probably be happy just to move off him. I'd guess Atlanta might be interested at that price and then AZ gets a high 2nd. Win-Win. Those two teams are likely to completely change the direction of their franchise though. I think this will be a historic draft class. If ever there was a class to have two picks. And I think people are really sleeping on Maye as well. He's a unique prospect;

Wait...WHAAAAT! Yelich has a No Trade Clause? So he can veto the trade? No way...that's almost like being 10/5. Amazing. What a fresh perspective here!

Yeah, it's a bad contract for the Brewers. Saying it's as likely as signing Judge is...LOL...c'mon. I JUST gave you an example of the very same team taking on a 9 figure contract a couple posts ago. You KNOW you don't believe what you're saying.

I certainly wouldn't suggest the Brewers get a large return. Carlos Herrera, Daniel Missak and a 3rd prospect type of trade and...if that 3rd pitcher does turn into Peralta, great, but it's really just about trading Yelich. And I get why that's not popular...but I think what will be popular, would be signing Chourio(for instance) very early on in his career would be very popular. I also believe the Brewers should have tried to sign Burnes after the 2020 season(we don't know if he was offered a deal prior to that, but we know he wasn't offered one since then).

I was refuting the idea that his value was so low the Giants wouldn't want to take the contract on by showing you an example of another player at age 32 who had nearly identical offensive production and they traded for him. It's not a 1 for 1 analogy, but it's about as close as you can get. And I'm not sure why you're jumping in here and saying they don't HAVE to make this trade after I literally said that exact same thing. I'd rather see them use their payroll on players between 20-30 moving forward. By the time they start to get expensive and into the 2nd year of arbitration, you're talking about trading him. So if Chourio was an Acuna Jr, this is the year they'd be moving off him most likely. Just because you don't have any other bad outstanding contracts doesn't mean you keep the one you have.

Sure...I suppose that's what started the conversation. The idea that you could put Chourio, Frelick and then Mitchell and Wiemer in the OF. Perkins and Taylor are also both look like adequate 4th OFers as well. This is clearly unlikely to happen and of course it's speculative, but that's the entire point of this forum. It's not like anyone here is dictating the Brewers roster decisions. If the Brewers could walk away from Yelich and his deal at this point, at a time when they're moving on from Burnes, Adames...likely Woodruff and Williams in the next couple years, it'd make sense to.

I don't know think it'd be a non-starter. I think it'd be a thin needle to thread and I said I don't think it's likely. You're saying there's ZERO reason to trade him in part because he's the face of the franchise. There are players all the time that the Brewers wouldn't go after in Free Agency, but other teams will obviously. Lets start out with IF he were a FA, what would he be likely to get? I think 5/110 is a pretty reasonable number given the lack of FA's out there. Evan Longoria to the Giants is a perfect example. The Rays owed him 6/100 in 2017 and the Giants traded for him despite the fact that 3 of the previous 4 years he'd had pretty average years. They were both 32 years old the first year with the Giants and the previous 4 seasons, Longoria had a .767 OPS, 111 OPS+ Yelich has a .768 OPS. 112 OPS+. So no, it's not a non-starter, it's a reason for the Brewers to want to move off of him. The Giants can take on far more risk than the Brewers can.

There's zero reason? There's several reasons. The last 3 seasons, his ongoing back issues, the remaining years on his contract will be ages 32-36, the Brewers financial limitations...those are all obvious reasons.

He's coming off a 3.6 WAR season, it's a unusually weak FA class and he had a NTC before hitting 10/5 anyway, so he'd always have to accept a trade. I don't think it's true he has no trade value. If he was a FA, I think he'd probably get somewhere in the 5/110 range. If that's the case and you can move him, I'd move him. That's why it's being talked about. That contract is thee reason to get rid of him.

Eh...yeah. I thought they had a chance...but I'm actually more fine with this loss than any other playoff loss by one of my teams. I've just kinda come to accept it.