adambr2

Since Encarnacion is a year older, and he got this money for three years, I would bet Braun, as a free agent, would get similar dollars, for four years - I don't see a reason why he wouldn't. The thing is, if you go to trade a guy who's signed for at or near what the market is paying - the prospects you get back are a premium for the other team - the talent they give up is above and beyond the money the player is worth .... and then they'll pay him the money too. To get the kind of talent you'd want in the deal, I think the Brewers already knew they'd have to take back some money in the trade - if the rumors concerning LA were true, Milwaukee had already acknowledged that by agreeing to take back Brandon McCarthy. The market for power bats has been slow this winter - Encarnacion sitting as long as he did was Exhibit A. "They" are talking about a glut of power hitters, and a glut of available outfielders. Everyone jumped on bullpen guys again, the White Sox sold big twice, the Dodgers paid big to keep what they already had - and really not a lot more until this deal for Encarnacion. The Brewers aren't going to give Braun away, if the market doesn't go their way this winter, then we'll watch Ryan Braun play some more baseball. Agreed. Teams tried to acquire Lucroy for below value and Stearns wouldn't allow that to happen. Same applies to Braun. Stearns understands what they're worth at a realistic level, not wishful thinking and won't part with him until that's on the table I think the Braun situation is quite a bit different than Lucroy in that there was never a question about Lucroy's surplus value, it was always a matter of posturing, just like any other trade. The Braun lowball offers, to an extent, reflect some genuine concerns about him. I do agree that Braun isn't going anywhere unless Stearns gets good value in return, but I don't think he will/should hesitate to eat plenty of the contract to make that happen if he needs to, especially on the back end of Braun's deal. Someone brought up a good point that the Indians do forfeit their very late 1st round pick to sign EE. So that at least provides us with a comparitive base to point to on what we should ask for if we were eating none of the contract.

Encarnacion is a great comp to Braun and does illustrate that Braun's contract, in both length and amount, doesn't really do us any favors in trading him. An additional problem with the Dodgers or any NL team is the fact that they can't just hide him at DH at any point, something which surely made Encarnacion more attractive to an AL team like the Indians.

I think you hit it on the head, there is no better answer. There is no way to accurately predict how Braun's production will be affected by his age. Which is exactly why the 4 remaining years for him are such a problem for other GMs rather than being a benefit. If he had 2 years left, it wouldn't be such a risk for them.

Well, he won't OPS .937 in 2017...Or I sure don't think he will, because if he does, he'll probably compete for an MVP award next year with his baserunning and D. But even if you take the cumulative average of what he did last year and project it out for a full season, that's a very valuable player. I agree he's a very tough projection. But we need to find out what the bigger picture is on him, so he absolutely needs to play every day next year, not 2 or 3 times a week, no matter how fast or slow he starts.

Are you meaning anything more by this than 'wish he would have?' I thought he went the pick before ours, but I was just curious as to whether there was more to the story.

The Mets are looking for a long-term every day CF in trade, but yeah, a team that was cheap on Lucroy up until the last possible minute isn't going to give us enough. I'm excited to see Broxton play for the Brewers in 2017. One of the things that still really makes the game fun when you know you're not going to contend, is finding out who your future stars are. Broxton, Villar, Arcia, Brinson when he gets here, those will all be my favorite guys to watch next year.

Yeah, it would make me sick to deal Broxton now and then watch him hit 20 HR and steal 60 bases next year. Because literally, if you project his stats last year out to a full season of ABs, that's what you'd get. So if his last 2 months were anything legitimate at all, he's going to be really good. I know it probably feels like I am overselling Broxton, but I don't believe I am. BWar and FWar were in agreement, he was a 2.1 WAR guy last season, (basically near $17M in FA value), and this was with literally about 1/3rd of a full season's worth of ABs, and this was after he was basically the worst player on the team til about the end of July. When you put it that way, it's a pretty astonishing rise. So to me, it's hard to sell a guy like that when you just really don't know what you have and no one is going to pay a top prospect price for the complete unknown.

I'm all for listening on any offers for anyone, but Broxton isn't a guy I would be motivated to move without a return consistent with what he did in the last few months of 2016 with a high level of cheap control. I don't think anyone will give us that now and Broxton is a guy with 6 years left of control who's value will skyrocket in 2017 if he proves the last half of 2016 wasn't a fluke, so I doubt he gets moved.

Pretty much exactly my thoughts, good read. This is why I feel Braun's value relative to his contract is basically zero, which sounds horrible, but I'm not saying negative, just zero. It just means I think Braun's remaining contract is about exactly what his current open market value is. So to get anything of real value back will likely require us to eat a substantial portion of the remaining contract. I think the Dodgers are probably getting cold feet on the August deal and I think those 20 minutes we missed a deal by will be regrettable.

LOL. Funny how that works. Braun's trade value as we've learned by now is quite subjective at least until the Brewers prove us otherwise. I do think there are a lot of factors at work that make him a unique situation, but I would agree he's probably going to go down as the greatest Brewer since Yount, especially if he gives us a few more good years. Molitor is right there too but some see him a bit differently since he finished out his career elsewhere.

Sounds like something Joe Morgan would have said as a commentator about Moneyball! Seriously though, Fangraphs is a great tool. Lots of info and knowledge to take from it. Obviously you have to take every piece of analysis with a grain of salt. Baseball reference is another, traditional scouting, they're all important IMO. I'm always open to hearing anything that can help me learn more about the game, even if I don't agree with it. I agree with some of the previous posters that a lot of these projections seem more like floors.

You're welcome!

Worked up? Calling someone out is not getting worked up. But now you're going to tell someone else what they can and cannot be offended by? Everything he posts is in a snarky tone and written just to be a jerk towards people who do no see it his way. Plenty of other ways to write an opinion than labeling people this or that while doing it. The bolded piece isn't the only piece of this puzzle. Yes, calling someone a complete jackass is kind of getting worked up. No I am not going to tell you what you can or cannot be offended by, I really do not care. Was simply defending the guy because I never got the impression of condescending tone from his posts at all, that's all.

Is the bolded really something that anyone should get worked up about? 'I believe most posters here who overvalue Braun would disagree?' That really offends anyone? That's his opinion that most people here overvalue Braun. So what? He didn't say it in a rude or disrespectful way. Obviously everyone here is giving their opinion. He believes most here overvalue Braun. I personally thought quoting him and telling him that he's being a complete jackass for a pretty mild sentence was more over the top than the original statement quote to be honest. I mean I'm not advocating for anyone at all to be in 'trouble' with the mods I just don't get what the big deal is about a guy stating that most posters here overvalue Braun. I'm sure some here believe a lot of posters here undervalue Braun. So what? I would simply disagree, but I wouldn't get worked up about it

Control is great when it's cheap and for a young player. When it's for a 33 year old at 19M a year, 4 years of control doesn't carry nearly as much value. Braun would be much easier to trade right now without all that control. He's a lot better fit for most teams as a short-term investment than a long-term one.

I would not be whatsoever surprised if we pick top 5 in 2018. We're improving, but improvement is not always linear in your W/L from year to year.

Easiest answer ever...NOPE. Why? Because to lose that many we need to suck...a lot. The teams need to constantly improve. Losing 100 games means a lot of guys are going to flop and our rebuild is a long way from.completion. Doesn't matter though as many great players are picked in the 9-14 range. I'll say one thing on this. ..if it's the last game of the season and we're tied for the worst record in the league, and there's a Bryce Harper type at #1 in next year's draft, I'm hoping we lose. Obviously that's an extraordinary circumstance, and you still don't tank or try to lose, at least not physically. You bench every good regular and play every young player available on your roster. But yeah, during the season, I want to win games. Losing isn't fun.

I hope so, although the more I think about it I get where they're coming from. We won't have Lucroy for any of the season. Arguably our 3 best relievers from last season are gone. Braun may or may not be gone. The best hope for improvement we can count on will be the growth of our young players like Arcia, Villar, Broxton and Santana. If they can grow quickly and be better than expected, we may surprise some people. But if not, I get why you can't gut a 73 win team and not expect to regress some in the standings. If I had to predict right now, I'd day this team wins 70 games next year. Obviously, there's a lot of offseason left.

I guess I'm just a little surprised how bad we are 'projected' to be. Now we are clearly still in a rebuilding mode and I've said all along I think our 2017 win total might be a little step back from 2016. I don't see any way we are relevant again before 2019. However to regress 9 games would be a bit of a disappointment. Although if we end up with the top overall pick and a franchise type prospect happens to be available at #1, that would be a pretty important building block.

That's a borderline conspiracy theory. Computations don't 'hate' Braun or want him to fail, they have no emotion. The only extent to which a computer cares about Braun's PED use is the extent to which it believes it will affect his 'regression rate.' You also cannot just say, 'Well if you take Braun's games and project it out to 135 he is a 4 WAR player. Those games missed, by injury or suspension, matter. They figure in to projections as well. Your last point 'Heaven forbid they post him as a 4 WAR projection and then he does have the 2WAR season..' . they already have. Braun was a projection darling, post-2012. I absolutely guarantee you that Braun's 2013 and 2014 projections were way, way higher than his actual production. They missed high. Last year, they missed low. Maybe he outperforms them this year too. If so, fantastic! But it's silly that people are borderline mad and offended that a computer thinks Ryan Braun will be a league average player in 2017 based on all available data.

Yeah, younger players are less projectable than veterans. My original point on this was simply Braun's WAR to try to illustrate why the rest of the league isn't nearly as bullish on him as we are just because he was good and somewhat healthy in 2016. But it's a slow time of year and I thought the entire roster and their projections is worthy of an offseason conversation.

They pegged the Brewers at 71 wins last year, and the Brewers won 73. This year they have the Brewers pegged at 64 wins, worst in baseball. Laugh all you want but they were 2 games off on their projection last year. Obviously some guys are going to outperform their projections, that's the whole reason it's just a 'projection', and when PECOTA releases theirs I'll post that to compare. But they aren't just meaningless opinionated drivel, they're based on data. Oh I'll laugh alright. You mention they predicted last year to be 71 wins but don't mention how they never predicted Guerra to be our ace, Villar to be the best lead off hitter since Molitor, and Braun to just play like Ryan Braun does. And probably much, much more if we really wanted to look into it. They were wrong, no matter how you want to slice it. First of all, they just about nailed Braun's WAR projection. PECOTA actually overestimated him. Secondly... Of COURSE they were wrong about individual players. It's a PROJECTION. It doesn't mean this guy is going to do exactly this, and this guy is going to do exactly that. It's a best assumption based off a TON of data, not emotion. You brought up Guerra and Villar, but last year they also way overestimated Flores, Cecchini, Santana, and even Arcia. Nelson too, I would almost certainly assume. That's how projections generally pan out. Some guys you miss high, some guys you miss low. Where did I ever imply that they just nailed it with every player? How in the world do you think they still came within 2 games on their cumulative projection if that wasn't how it worked, and they just underestimated our whole team?

They pegged the Brewers at 71 wins last year, and the Brewers won 73. This year they have the Brewers pegged at 64 wins, worst in baseball. Laugh all you want but they were 2 games off on their projection last year. Obviously some guys are going to outperform their projections, that's the whole reason it's just a 'projection', and when PECOTA releases theirs I'll post that to compare. But they aren't just meaningless opinionated drivel, they're based on data.

And very possible he's a .900+ OPS player again and a team that can't hit lefties like the Dodgers ponie up some player should for him. Fangraphs projections can lick em. Look at his numbers since beginning to get health. Numbers are trending up, not down. Offensively AND defensively. Yeah, it's possible. It's also possible he plays in 100 games and comes closer to his 2014 numbers. But their best guess is around a league average value player. You do realize, these projections take a lot of data into account. Stats, trends, injuries, age, career history, everything. They're all a piece of the pie. They are not just drawing numbers out of a hat or making biased assumptions, and they aren't ignorant to the fact that Braun had a good 2016 season. The 'trend' is not everything. It's one piece of data but that's it...there's a lot more to it. http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/projections/

From Fangraphs - haven't dove into the pitching staff yet but here is the lineup : Villar: .730 OPS, 1 WAR Broxton: .682 OPS, 1 WAR Braun: .837 OPS, 1.9 WAR Thames: .626 OPS, -1.8 WAR Shaw: .741 OPS, 1.1 WAR Susac: .707 OPS, 0.9 WAR Arcia: .666 OPS, 0.3 WAR Santana: .787 OPS, 0.9 WAR I really hope our scouts are right and the computers are wrong, because if not, that's barely better than a AAA quality lineup. For the record, most of it doesn't make much sense to me. I expect some dropoff from Villar offensively but figure on a little bit improved D if he sticks at 2nd. All in all, I'd be surprised if he was worse than a 2 WAR player. Broxton...mostly the same. The guy played terrible baseball for all but about 6 weeks last year and still put up a 2.1 WAR. Braun, some regression wouldn't surprise me but below 2...that would be tough. Thames, I realize that it's tough to translate Korea to MLB stats, but I can't understand why they project him to be a complete disaster. Shaw, Susac, and Santana I guess look pretty close to me. They're projecting basically zero progression from Arcia.