Matt Breen

Kirby signed, so time to get your lists in!

Lucroy deal: 3 year extension for $51M, which includes a $15M signing bonus (paid out in installments of $8M in 2016 and $7M in 2017), and annual salaries of $12M from 2018-20. Luc is scheduled to make roughly $4M in 2016, and $5M in 2017. That means he'd take home $12M each year - right in line with the rest of the deal. Luc could wait until after 2017, but a lot can happen between then and now. This gets him some serious guaranteed money - $60M over five years (combining the extension with the two years he has left on his deal). It's not the $75-85M that Martin, Molina and McCann got - but he's not a free agent for two years. And the $51M in new money is in line with the deals (at least on an annual basis) that the other catchers have gotten. I'm not saying we should do this - just a suggestion on a way to do an extension that might palatable to everyone. Without a potential replacement for Luc, it solidifies the position for a long time. And even if Luc does decline, he should still provide decent value. We wouldn't be paying him $20M while he's a 34 year old catcher. We spread the payments out so he's not a big suck on payroll. Again, just an idea.

Has absolutely nothing to do with this, but isn't hot stove season in the winter?It's grilling season. Too hot out to have the stove on.

I think jerichoholicninja put it pretty nicely. Say you could pull off trades for Walker and Syndergard, you do have a nice looking rotation. CF, C and 3B are black holes. Parra, if you resign him, is not a very CF, and his excellent hitting is probably begging to regress to his norms. If no Parra, you're using Peterson or Schafer. Maldonado hasn't shown he's anything more than a back up - both times he got to show off his abilities everyday he's hit below .200. The offense just wouldn't be very good. The bullpen has some nice potential, but overall depth is questionable. Regarding re-build vs re-tool, I think trading Luc and Gomez really puts you down the 'rebuild' path pretty far. Segura, Lind, Parra, K-Rod - that's about all left that's attractive. I say deal these guys as well and add a few more quality pieces and play for 2017 (and beyond), when you have Arcia, Taylor, Reed, Wagner and some other arms coming into play.

Appel is kind of an odd guy. Big pedigree, flashes of brilliance, but mediocre results. I haven't seen the guy pitch, so I'd leave it to others to to judge his ultimate value, but if the club sees him as a top of the rotation type, he's certainly the type of guy to go after - if Houston is willing to deal him. Moran and Reed would fill needs (3B and 1B). Moran hasn't matured as expected in the power department, but he's hit for average. Still, I'd love to have the guy - he'd immediately be our top 3B prospect. Reed has put up some killer numbers at A ball, but I don't know much about him. Huge guy - something like 240-250 lbs. Any of these guys have their question marks, but they do have promise. I don't think any are sure things (not many players are), but there's a lot to like about them.

Mariners reportedly near a deal for a catcher... http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/mariners-nearing-deal-for-catcher.html

I don't mind major league talent so long as we have significant control over the player. We'd still have Walker through 2020, which is fine.

Walker's really interesting. Started terrible - 7.33 ERA in his first nine starts. 3.04 ERA since. Strikeout per inning. So he seems to have settled in. A lot people have liked the guy for a while. It's probably not a bad matchup. I just don't know if Seattle would give a decent looking starter - they've had issues with the rotation. I didn't realize Montero was hitting that well.

Take that, you cynics.

Of the Arizona guys, Clark and Lara really excite me. Clark just seems like such an advanced hitter. That's something we really needed in the org. I love seeing that exceptional plate discipline at such a young age. Lara just seems ooze ability - and only 17. Awesome. He's a true power bat. Segovia is interesting, but his stats say singles hitter, which is limiting. Perry is fascinating, but he's nothing if he doesn't control his weight. Gotta love his walk rate and hitting so far, but there is a huge obstacle he needs to overcome. So for me, Clark and Lara are the guys to really get excited about.

Definately Chapman. Two years removed from dual hip surgery, and pitching great. I've liked Pena's arm, and thought the bullpen move was great, but he's still wildly inconsistent. I'd like to give him one more chance, but the world won't end of he's lost.

I think these are some good starting point. Let the young guys play. Cycle out the guys who aren't part of the future. A-Ram, Cotts, Broxton, Parra, Lohse - all are gone after the season, so actively look to move them. Some have value, some don't. Some may take longer to move than others, but ultimately, move them so you have room for younger players with a future. None of them should be on the team once September comes around. If not one wants A-Ram or Lohse by then, even for minimal salary relief, you just let them go and let other guys get a chance to play. I don't want to rush guys. Arcia, Reed, Taylor - those kinds of players can wait another year. Their time will come, but don't start service clocks before players are ready. And no point in sticking them on bad teams when you don't have to. I really want to make sure Scooter and Davis get regular playing time. It's time for those guys to show what they can do. Let 'em play regularly. It's their job - now prove you deserve. I'd make bullpen spots for Goforth and Chapman - again, guys who could be part of the future. As for Perez as 3B, I'm not at all sold on him as a regular there (or even 2B). He'll never hit enough for 3B. But at this point, I don't really care. Like with Scooter and Davis, I'm okay giving him a shot once you let go of Ramirez. If he surprises, great. If not, you learn about his limitations. Rotation is Fiers, Peralta, Jungmann, Nelson and Garza (or Cravy if Garza is injured). Speaking of Garza, let him stay in the rotation and hope to regain some value. You might not be able to trade him today, but if he has a good 2nd half, maybe this offseason he can net something decent. Or if he starts off 2016 pitching well, someone might want him then. If Garza has long term health issues that sideline him this year, just let Cravy start. As noted in the thread intro, this isn't really about trades, but I'll just say you put everyone who isn't part of the future available for the right price. Gomez, Lind, Lucroy, K-Rod - even Peralta and Segura (who both have three years of control left). Get young talent, as high upside as possible. None of these players has to be dealt this year if the offer isn't what you want. You can do things in the off season, or next year. Whatever works.

Wasn't most of the package we sent KC 'major-league ready'? Escobar had played close to a 100 games under his belt in Milwaukee. Lorenzo Cain had about a 1/3 of a season under his belt. Jeffress had appeared in a dozen or so games. Odorizzi was the only guy not ready for the majors. He had just finished A ball, if I recall. KC got our players at a perfect time - with 1 or less years of ML service but still ready to contribute in the majors right away. Things didn't work out perfectly for them. Jeffress had personal issues that held him back. Cain got hurt his first year, but then came around. No, the Brewers didnt' give up more established veterans, but I think the majority of the package qualified as major league ready.

BrewersAA, go edit your Top 25. I won't calculate things until the deadline is past, so it's not a problem.

He has said in an interview that the "developmental" scrutiny in the minor leagues is one of the reasons he struggled with walks and ERA. Im not sure what it says about his make up, the brewers development, or what but its interesting. He said that they hate walks and you knew if you walked a guy you wouldnt be getting a chance to move up, so it caused him to try to be perfect on the corners or not pitch to the right situations, you couldnt pitch around a good hitter with a guy on second and first base open and one out. Anyway i dont remember the whole transcript but i thought that was really interesting. He basically called out the brewers developmental guys for the high walks and high ERA and said what they are doing to try to keep you from walking guys was causing him to walk more guys. I just kind of go back to remembering that pitching is as much mental as it is physical. Jungmann's success kind of makes a guy wonder about Jed Bradley. Correct, there are so many factors in a player's development and make up. Peralta really stepped up last year by learning not to let a bad pitch or bad play get to him. He'd get angry and frustrated, and then give up big innings. I think he said that was a big reason he improved last year - he simply matured as a pitcher.

19 submissions so far! Keep 'em coming. I want to beat the high - I think we had 29 last year. Thanks.

Thanks for clarifying. Yours was the first dissenting opinion that I've seen on Gatewood, so I was curious what drove it. Prior to the draft last year, a lot of scouts were wary of Gatewood because of his long swing. They knew he was going to strike out a lot. But he has power. I think he rated the top high school power bat. Still, a lot of people saw 'bust' on him, even if the power was really tantalizing. I don't think Gatewood's performance has changed many minds. I look at Joey Gallo, who had some issues similar to Gatewood's coming out of HS. Gallo fell to the 39th pick (very similar to Gatewood who was picked 41st) because contact issues (again, similar to Gatewood). Gallo came into pro ball and has crushed. The strikeouts are there, but he's certainly made himself a top prospect. Gatewood has struggled, but in his defense, I think Gallo was a little more mature physically than Jake. Gallo aside, the strikeout rates ebmackenzie notes are really worrisome. He's got a 37% strikeout rate thus far - plus low walk rates. That's just unsustainable. Again, as ebmackenzie notes, I'd bet Gatewood has more of a chance of failing than succeeding. You hope you are wrong, but that's my honest assessment at this time. Still, it's hard to ignore the talent. And the guy is only 19. I'm not giving up on a guy like Gatewood. I'm not even betting against him. There's so many variables in a player's development (mental and physical) - we just can't see that yet.

I've been pretty enthusiastic about Jungmann. I thought he showed a lot of progress last year - improving K rates, lowering walk rates, all that sort of thing. I liked how he rebounded at AAA (after his promotion) after struggling early on last year. I can't explain his performance at Colorado Springs. We all know the difficulty of pitching there. He had a 7.89 ERA at home, vs 4.85 on the road. So it's not like he was burning it up away from Colorado - but he was much better. I also don't know about the defense at Colorado Springs, as well as the field. The guy is a ground ball pitcher, and maybe he was victimized by bad defense and/or poor playing conditions. Maybe it helps having Lucroy behind the plate as well. The thing I've noticed with Jungmann (as others have mentioned) is control. He has simply walked too many batters in his career. I'm not sure if his somewhat funky delivery makes repeating his pitches a little more difficult (just speculation), but he does seem to go through phases where things come together and he pitches well (or poorly). I suspect we are in a 'good' phase right now. In the end, it's about consistency for Jungmann - not an uncommon thing for any pitcher (young or old). People talk about 'ace' material - I think that's a big stretch. He needs to show the ability to pitch consistent for an entire season - something he has never done. Doesn't mean he can't do it, but he hasn't shown that ability thus far. I like Taylor. Looks like he could be a workhorse type of guy. He seems to throw pretty loose and easy. I would be thrilled if he ends up a #3 type of guy. I think getting him to that level of play will be helped by playing in Milwaukee with a couple of veteran catchers. And the early success is a great thing for Jungmann. No one likes to worry about getting yanked around if they have one bad outing - I think he's earned a little leash. The last thing about Taylor is that it's great seeing the Brewers develop another real pitching prospect. He may not be an all-star, but if you can fill the middle/back of the rotation with cheap starters like Jungmann, you don't have to spend $10-15M on average veterans on the free agent market.

Braun took PEDs? When did that happen?

More lazy defense. Just frustrating.

Unbelievable how crappy this team can play. Should have been out of this. Lazy defense costs Nelson.

How people want to rank their players is really their business - just like 'professionals' who do it. Some people place more value on players who are closer to the majors, some people place value on upside, etc. I don't think either way is right or wrong. They are just different. And as I noted in my previous post, this is supposed be fun. I want people to participate. Some people will know more (some times a lot more) than others. I think it's a great way to get people looking at the minor league system who might not have done so before. With that in mind, I really prefer to avoid any criticism of other people's decisions. This is for fun (that silly 'fun' again). We're not going to test people to see if they know enough about the system to let them vote. We want people to get participate. I should also note that general observations about how the voting is going shouldn't immediately be construed as criticism. If I say that it's interesting that Player A has dropped more than they thought he deserved, that isn't a slight against someone. It's just an observation. Now if a person says 'You idiots are letting Player A fall too far', then that's a different story. Again, keep in mind what this is supposed to be for. It's a fun thing, designed to stimulate participation, encourage people to learn more, etc. I know I'm being all Kumbyaish - but that's how I feel about this. I volunteered to run things, and we had fun. I don't want to turn the process into a fight. Thank you.

Regarding the eligibility rules, I set up the guidelines, and I hope as many people as possible play along in the fashion it's meant to be - a fun, community affair. It's not brain surgery we are doing. No one is going to die if we make a decision one way or the other. No one is going to lose money. The world won't end. This is supposed to be fun. I'm all for discussing changes in the future, but once I set up the guidelines for this version, I'm not going to change things halfway through. Again, this is supposed to be fun. But if people are horrified at the idea of putting a specific player on their list because they don't like the guidelines, then whatever. I can't stop that. For now, I would rather have someone say, "Here's my list according to how you asked, but in the future I think you should handle a player such as (insert name) in (insert how to handle player)."

I don't see anyone overpaying for Segura. He's got a .650 OPS - and that's an improvement over last year. His defense is average. He does have some upside - his dynamic 2013 start showed that - so some team might be willing to throw the dice that they can reclaim that performance. If someone does overpay for Jean, great. Take it and build for 2017 and beyond. Otherwise, you just ride Segura out as SS until Arcia is ready. He can then shift to 2B (I think he would be an above average second baseman), and even if he can improve his hitting a little, he'd be a decent player there. Or he could be a trade chip. If he's putting up a .750 OPS next year at this time, he could net a lot, but we have to hope that Jean ups his game over the next year. Personally, I'm just not buying Segura as nothing more than average. His walk rate - never good - is atrocious. And it seems like pitchers have adjusted to him - while he's not matured as a hitter. I'm not going to give up on the guy - he's got talent. But I'd give him another year or so until Arcia is ready, then see what his future is. But if during that time someone comes up with a good offer, I'd take it. If he's producing a .650 OPS at this time next year, no one will give up a lot for him as every day that passes and he doesn't improve will only cement his value in people's eyes.

How about Parra and Lind for Newcomb and Kyle Kubitza. Angels fill two big holes - LF and DH.