Matt Breen

I have heard that the Brewers are very wary of adding contracts beyond the current CBA (which runs through 2021). It doesn't mean we won't add someone beyond 2 years - but it's unlikely. This is very fringy information (know someone who knows someone type of stuff) - so don't take it as gospel. It does, however, gel with how this off season has been going with regards to roster construction.

I think this is the club's strategy: 1. Find value in players. Any players. It's kind of ruthless, but the idea is that if you look at what you lost, and replace it in any way possible. According the Fangraphs, the Brewers produced 24.2 offensive WAR in 2019. Going forward, it's not about replacing Moose or Grandal. But instead reaching that number (or 30.0 WAR or whatever the goal is). If Moose produced 3.0 WAR and Arcia 0.0 WAR, are we worse off if Sogard produces 2.0 WAR and Gyorko produces 1.0 WAR? I'm not trying to say yes or no - just that I think this is how the team is approaching things. 2. The team is leaving itself open to future moves to improve the team. Financial flexibility is the value. Obviously, we have a payroll far below last year's number, but that means we can potentially add as needed. The team is setting itself up to add players as needed later on the season. One of the biggest issues that teams face when making trade deadline deals is they can't take on salary. This limits many deals teams can make. I will use the example of JD Martinez a few years ago. When he got dealt to Arizona, hardly anyone was interested in him despite his exceptional bat. Now, his limited ability in the field is one reason - but so was salary. Many teams didn't want to take on the rest of this salary - which was more than $5M. The Dbacks ended up getting him for some minor prospects, and he was a huge addition for them down the stretch. In the end, it allows us to make a few deals without giving away prospects or important players off the roster. It's just us taking on salary. 3. It leaves the team open to future moves if things go badly. This is the flip side of #2. If things go badly, a team can really be dragged down by long term contracts. If this happens in 2020, the team can much more easily retool for 2021. Guys like Sogard - on cheap, one year deals - are easy to trade if they are playing well. And if we can't move them, it's easy to reset for 2021 since they are not tied to us long term. Financial flexibility is a huge advantage to any team. I think we are going to try and use it. It's also an excuse to be cheap - but that's been discussed ad nauseam in some other threads. I don't think Milwaukee will be making any major FA moves. I could still see a trade or two happening, maybe a lower tier FA pitcher, but I think Stearns will simply take what he can. If it's not there, he'll roll with what he has. That can be frustrating for fans, but such is life.

I think this is the club's strategy: 1. Find value in players. Any players. It's kind of ruthless, but the idea is that if you look at what you lost, and replace it in any way possible. According the Fangraphs, the Brewers produced 24.2 offensive WAR in 2019. Going forward, it's not about replacing Moose or Grandal. But instead reaching that number (or 30.0 WAR or whatever the goal is). If Moose produced 3.0 WAR and Arcia 0.0 WAR, are we worse off if Sogard produces 2.0 WAR and Gyorko produces 1.0 WAR? I'm not trying to say yes or no - just that I think this is how the team is approaching things. 2. The team is leaving itself open to future moves to improve the team. Financial flexibility is the value. Obviously, we have a payroll far below last year's number, but that means we can potentially add as needed. The team is setting itself up to add players as needed later on the season. One of the biggest issues that teams face when making trade deadline deals is they can't take on salary. This limits many deals teams can make. I will use the example of JD Martinez a few years ago. When he got dealt to Arizona, hardly anyone was interested in him despite his exceptional bat. Now, his limited ability in the field is one reason - but so was salary. Many teams didn't want to take on the rest of this salary - which was more than $5M. The Dbacks ended up getting him for some minor prospects, and he was a huge addition for them down the stretch. In the end, it allows us to make a few deals without giving away prospects or important players off the roster. It's just us taking on salary. 3. It leaves the team open to future moves if things go badly. This is the flip side of #2. If things go badly, a team can really be dragged down by long term contracts. If this happens in 2020, the team can much more easily retool for 2021. Guys like Sogard - on cheap, one year deals - are easy to trade if they are playing well. And if we can't move them, it's easy to reset for 2021 since they are not tied to us long term. Financial flexibility is a huge advantage to any team. I think we are going to try and use it. It's also an excuse to be cheap - but that's been discussed ad nauseam in some other threads. I don't think Milwaukee will be making any major FA moves. I could still see a trade or two happening, maybe a lower tier FA pitcher, but I think Stearns will simply take what he can. If it's not there, he'll roll with what he has. That can be frustrating for fans, but such is life.

Interesting signing, but not very inspiring. Gyorko was a perfectly good player from 2016-18. Just cratered last year. Club must feel last year was a fluke. He doesn't seem like the body type to age well (but I said that about Moose as well). I'm not terribly optimistic, but let's cross our fingers. We are rolling the dice on a bunch of players, which makes everyone uneasy, including myself. That's why we love 'proven' players. Sign Moustakas and you pencil him in for .250+ and 30 HRs. At least that's a more likely result than Gyorko hitting 30 HRs again. Everyone loves that predictability. As this is a guaranteed deal, I doubt the club brings in another infielder (short of someone who is AAA filler). Smoak, Hiura, Urias, Sogard, Arcia, Gyorko. Yelich is, of course, a machine. Let's hope Cain rebounds to his 2018 form.

Interesting signing, but not very inspiring. Gyorko was a perfectly good player from 2016-18. Just cratered last year. Club must feel last year was a fluke. He doesn't seem like the body type to age well (but I said that about Moose as well). I'm not terribly optimistic, but let's cross our fingers. We are rolling the dice on a bunch of players, which makes everyone uneasy, including myself. That's why we love 'proven' players. Sign Moustakas and you pencil him in for .250+ and 30 HRs. At least that's a more likely result than Gyorko hitting 30 HRs again. Everyone loves that predictability. As this is a guaranteed deal, I doubt the club brings in another infielder (short of someone who is AAA filler). Smoak, Hiura, Urias, Sogard, Arcia, Gyorko. Yelich is, of course, a machine. Let's hope Cain rebounds to his 2018 form.

Passan says no Harrison Bader and Lane Thomas involved. So, thus far: St. Louis gets: Liberatore Competitive Balance Round B Pick Unknown asset Rays get: Competitive Balance Round A Pick Unknown asset Unknown asset As noted above, the Competitive Balance swap mean the Rays will move up roughly 30 spots - and the Cards will drop a corresponding number.

Cardinals and Rays fans must be peeing their pants right now...

This could be pretty major. Liberatore is a nice prospect.

Awful lot of handwriting over a guy who pitched 22 not-very-good innings over the last two years. I understand everyone wanted Nelson so he could try and recapture the magic of 2017, but the price tag of arbitration - I believe the estimate was $3.7M - was prohibitive. At that point, Nelson was a free agent. He had the chance to shop his services with all 30 teams - a nice bit of leverage for any player - even a guy coming off two years of injuries. I realize there's a sentimental attachment to Nelson - one of the few good starters we've developed in the past decade or two - but who knows how much the Brewers valued him. And who knows how much Nelson just wanted a change of scenery. It's all speculation. But in the end, Jimmy had the chance to shop himself around, and put himself in what he feels is the best situation for him. I'm not going to fret over that. I hope the guy does well. He had some nice times in Milwaukee, and seemed like a standup dude.

Another reliever off the board. Chisek gets 1 year/$6M with an option for a $6.75M salary in 2021. The option can be bought out for $750,000. Word is that Chisek wanted to play in Boston (he is from the area), but the Red Sox have not been in a spending mood of late. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/white-sox-to-sign-steve-cishek.html

You really can't. This is one person's list. He's entitled to his opinions. But take it with a grain of salt. He probably would have had Cam Roegner as the top RHP if the Brewers had not just released him (on the flip side, Clancy loved Suter as a minor leaguer - far more than most people - and he's been a decent player so far).

Thames has turned his Korea success into four years and $20M at the major league level. Well done.

Good price for Thames. Wish him well - when he's not playing us.

I'm guessing Frazier may be of interest to Milwaukee, or Stearns makes a trade. I doubt the club relies on Healy and Sogard to cover 3B. But you never know. Stearns may look at these guys as a group - Smoak, Healy, Hiura, Sogard, Urias, Arcia - and feel they can handle things better than what ever else is out there. Healy can play some 3B and 1B, Sogard can play 3B and 2B, Arcia SS, 2B, Urias 2B, SS and 3B. It's not my ideal group of players, but it might be what we are heading towards. Short of signing Donaldson (which I doubt is going to happen), I am guessing a trade is the most likely scenario. But anything is really possible.

I enjoyed the Madalorian as well. Very good show.

As a note, only 10 position players in the last decade produced a 5.0 fWAR or greater at age 33 or older. Donaldson had a 4.9 fWAR last year - his age 33 season. It is a mixed bag. The list is only 10 guys - showing how difficult it is to maintain elite play at 33 and beyond. Almost no one maintains higher level production (4.0+ WAR) after age 34. (Nelson Cruz and Adrian Beltre can take a bow for the exceptional play as they advanced into their later 30s - really remarkable). Below are the players - listing the ages they played, and the fWAR they produced during that time. Jed Lowrie* (33-35) - 3.6, 5.0, -0.1 Joey Votto* (33-35) - 6.5, 3.5. 0.7 Robinson Cano (33-36) - 6.3, 3.1, 2.9, 0.8 Adrian Beltre (33-39) - 6.3, 4.9, 5.9, 4.3, 5.5, 2.9, 1.1 Ian Kinsler (33-37) - 3.9, 5.4, 2.6, 2.2, -0.2 Curtis Granderson* (33-38) - 1.2, 5.3, 3.1, 2.1, 0.9, -1.4 Jose Bautista (33-37) - 6.2, 5.2, 1.5, -0.4, 1.0 Nelson Cruz* (33-38) - 3.9, 5.0, 4.4, 3.8, 2.5, 4.3 Jayson Werth (33-38) - 1.4, 4.4, 5.3, -0.1, 1.3, -0.3 Aramis Ramirez (33-37) - 3.3, 5.4, 1.3, 1.7, 1.1 *Still active I'm sure what scares teams is guys like Jose Bautista. Or Miguel Cabrera (who had a 4.8 fWAR at age 33, and then a total of 0.2 fWAR ever since). Votto looks like he's heading down that path as well. Amazing at 33. Good at 34. Mediocre at 35 last season. I'm not trying to justify a Donaldson addition (or a rejection of it). Just showing the numbers. While he was healthy in 2019, he missed 2/3 of 2018, and 1/3 of 2017 due to injuries. Personally, I'd love Donaldson. Based on the history of older players, I'm not sure how wise an investment he'd be down the road, but he certainly would be great to have at this time.

Albert Pujols provided bWAR of 4.0 and 3.0 during his age 34/35 season. He has since provided a combined bWAR of 0.3 in his last four seasons. The big issue with older players is they can get a little slower, lose a hair of quickness, and then start being affected health-wise by a lifetime of playing the game. It can lead to - at times - a quick decline in production. I'm not saying Donaldson will suffer this - just that it is much more likely to happen to an aging player like himself.

I thought Cabrera was a guy the Brewers might go after. League average, switch hitter, minimal splits, adequate defensively, cheap. Not a great player by any means, but a solid player. With the team's reported interest in Castro, I'm guessing Stearns wants to add someone. Just not sure who at this point. Todd Frazier might be in our sights. Or just as a likely a trade.

Josh Donaldson has reportedly set his price at 4-years/$110M. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/josh-donaldson-reportedly-sets-asking-price.html

2-years, $12M. Castro is expected to play 2B. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/01/nationals-to-sign-starlin-castro.html

The most comparable trade for a player like Hader is probably Andrew Miller. I think it's a smart thing to revisit the trade as we try and ascertain the value of Hader on the trade market. Miller was one of the most dominating relievers in baseball when he was traded by the Yankees to the Indians in July of 2016. He had 2 1/3 seasons remaining on his deal, which paid him $9M annually. He was 31 years old at the time. Miller had produced seasons of 2.2 and 2.0 fWAR (bWAR was 1.9 and 2.4) in 2014-15. At the time of his trade, he was having his finest season (1.39 ERA, 77K in 44.1 IP). He would go on to produce 2.9 fWAR/3.7 bWAR. Hader has produced 2.6 and 2.3 fWAR in 2018-19 (2.1 and 2.6 bWAR). So those are comparable numbers. In the end, both were awesome in this time frame. In 2015, Miller was voted the AL's top reliever while in 2019, Hader was the NL's top reliever. Hader worked more innings, but is younger, and has less wear and tear on his arm. In the end, I don't think it is a huge difference. You can argue that the two men were in very similar situations (career-wise). So, while the two are comparable, what is different between the two players? 1. Hader has 4 full years of control, compared to 2.5 for Miller. And extra one and a half years is major. This is probably the biggest difference between the two players, and if comparing in a vacuum, makes Hader a more attractive player. However, the players exist in the real world - and I think that does matter. See next points. 2. Miller was in the midst of an absolutely brilliant 2016 season. He would strikeout 123 batters in 74.1 innings and have an ERA of 1.45 that year. 3. Miller was dealt at the trade deadline. These two factors were huge in determining the return for Miller. You had one of the best (perhaps the best) relievers in baseball - having an incredible year (even for him) - available at the trade deadline, and teams were desperate to add him. These made for a sense of urgency that forced teams to act if they wanted him. The Return Miller netted prospects Clint Frazier and Justus Sheffield in the deal (as well as two other lower level relievers - J.P. Feyereisen and Ben Heller). We will focus on the two main pieces of the deal - Frazier and Sheffield. Frazier - coming in to 2016, Frazier was ranked #44 by Baseball America, #27 by MLB Pipeline, and #53 by Baseball Prospectus. He was only 21 years old. He had reached AA, and was having a good season (.825 OPS), but not a dominating one. The fifth overall pick in the draft in 2013, scouts had always loved Frazier's skillset, although he had never really had a huge minor league season at this point (or since). Of course, he had always been very young compared to his peers. Sheffield - coming into 2016, the left handed throwing Sheffield was ranked #81 by Baseball America, but not in the Top 100 by MLB Pipeline or Baseball Prospectus. The 31st overall pick in the 2014 draft, Sheffield had reached A+ ball that year, and was having a good season (3.59 ERA, 93K in 95 IP). While not on some prospects lists, he was a rising name, only 20 years old, and would reach the upper tiers of Top 100 lists by the off season. So, looking at the deal, we can probably say that the Yankees got a Top 30-50 level prospect in Frazier, and an upper tier (80-90) level prospect in Sheffield. At the time, the return of Frazier and Sheffield was considered very good for the Yankees. The return for Hader With that all said, if we use this trade as a guide, what could we expect for Hader? You can argue we should get more since it's 4 years versus 2.5. And that's probably true. However, we also need to take in account the timing of the deal. Right now, one of the things that many teams don't have is a sense of urgency. It's the offseason. Having Josh Hader doesn't make or break a season for a team at this time. In the end, the 1.5 extra years of Hader does matter - but maybe not massively. I think the urgency you find at the trade deadline dampens Hader's return (as compared to Miller's), but not a lot. The extra 1.5 years certainly makes up for that - and probably more. But we can't just say we should get a 40% better return because a team will get Hader for 40% more. In the end, I think that if we dealt Hader, we would expect a return a little better than what Miller fetched. Again, that means a Top 30-50 player, and another guy at the back end of the Top 100. How much better is certainly debatable - but I don't think it's massive. Figuring this out is a bit dicey as many of the prospect lists we have are almost a year old - so we are running off of old lists. I don't think it's out of the question that we could land a top 20 or even top 10 player in a trade, but clubs don't let such guys go very often. Just using prospect rankings as a guide, I could easily see something like players #25 and #60 or something like that. It's very inexact - but I think you get the idea. One way to improve Hader's return - hold on to him and deal him at the deadline if we are out of the race. Of course, there is a risk as Hader might get hurt or his performance may regress. But getting teams desperate for a huge bullpen arm in the heat of the pennant race is probably the best way to maximize Hader's return. Hope this has been interesting for some of you.

Turner is a good example of where we could get him for cheap by just picking up his contract. All this assumes LA wants to get rid of salary and view Turner as expendable. I'm also going to again mention Chris Taylor. He hasn't played a lot of 3B, but I'm guessing he'd be fine. He would add a lot of versatility to the team. Sogard, Taylor, Urias, Hiura would be a decent collection of infielders. Not a lot of power, but potentially pretty solid. Arcia is there too - even if just for defensive purposes. Taylor may be the odd man out in LA unless they move Turner or Peterson or whomever.

I would love Harris at that price. While he's 35, he's been an excellent player. Another quality arm is worth the investment.

Note: Miller had 2.5 years of control remaining when dealt. Otherwise, I understand the desire about getting a high level prospect back if Hader is dealt. The precedent is there. Kirilloff had a meh 2019 (mostly due to injuries), so he might drop in rankings. He had an amazing 2018, so we'd love to get the guy. No matter, you want some serious talent if the Crew is going to deal Hader. Personally, I'd like someone to help us now, as well as additional guys to potentially help us down the road. But honestly, I'm okay with a big haul - no matter what level the guys.

Totally agree. I feel like since they have Cruz at DH already, that if they sign Donaldson, Sano will be on the trade market. The Twins are going to look to continue improving during this competitive window and adding Hader to the back of their bullpen would be huge for them in shortening games, especially come playoff time. I would take Arraez over Sano if they wanted to go that route. I just don’t see them doing that since he has at least 5 years of control left compared to Sano’s 2. Even if the Brewers hold onto Hader, I could see them laying the foundation to a trade now with the Twins and revisiting a trade come midseason. I think the Brewers and Twins match up nicely as well -- however I think the original proposal - 3B Miguel Sano (2 years of control), OF/1B Alex Kirilloff (MLB #15 prospect), RHP Brusdar Graterol (MLB #53 prospect) OR RHP Jordan Balazovic (MLB #76 prospect), and OF Trevor Larnach is really heavily in our favor. I think it's overvaluing Hader. I realize we can overvalue Hader as we hold the cards in any such deal. But Kirilloff is a top 20 player. Graterol, Balazovic and Larnach are all top 100 players. To get three of those guys - plus more - is a lot. And I doubt the Twins give up so much considering they will need cheap players in the coming years. No matter, it doesn't mean something couldn't be worked out. I think something like Arraez, Larnach and one of Graterol or Balazovic would be fair. Arraez goes into our IF rotation, while Larnarch is a good looking OF bat, and Graterol or Balazovic would be a nice upside arm for the system. We get a player for now (Arraez) and a couple of guys for near future. Perhaps we can get more, and the club should certainly try.