adambr2

I'm not surprised. I think the Dodgers are a great fit for Braun, but the money issue is a big one, an issue that might kill any deal to them this offseason. Unlike most teams, the Dodgers have been over the luxury tax threshold the last few years, so any additional salary they take on has a 50% tax on it. Braun seems like a fair deal at $19M a season, but he's a whole lot less appealing at $28.5M/season.

I would do Carter / Clark or Thornburg in a heartbeat. However, I think Mejia's availability had a lot more to do with them trying to land Lucroy for the pennant race and next year more than anything else. I don't see them looking to deal Mejia now unless they're blown away. They're still a build from within type franchise, and they're not exactly rich with catching talent at the MLB level.

Yeah, at some point, you've got to build around some of the guys who are not only young but among your best players at the MLB level. You can't sell them all. I could understand if Villar was entering his 2nd arby year, but he's already under club control through 2020. I don't think he's due for a significant regression. I think his average and OBP might dip a bit, but his power should remain pretty consistent and I think there's a good chance his defense and baserunning instincts will improve as he matures. (speaking of that, has anyone even brought up his baserunning in the last month? Maybe he's already starting to trend in the right direction there. ) I don't see any reason he won't be a good player for a long time. It would take a hell of a pitching prospect to make me want to part with him, and I don't see that happening.

Hmm, all fair points. I guess for one, we disagree on the definition of a decent prospect. You mentioned a Hill, Lind, and Segura return, and I see big differences between the 3. A Hill return I think is the most plausible return for Garza. Partial (but not total) salary relief, and a couple minor league fillers with little chance to every contribute at the MLB level. Lind is probably a little step up, and I suppose a return of one of those types of players is possible with a strong finish. In no scenario do I see us getting an Isan Diaz type prospect back, and it's tough for me to see any scenario where we aren't required to eat some salary IIRC correctly even when we traded Gallardo we had to pay some of his remaining year. I also have doubts as to what a 4.00 ERA type starter is really worth these days, even in a down starting pitching market.

Yeah, my personal feelings. ..If I'm in Villar's position, and my employer is offering me 40M dollars and I've never made over half a million in a season, I'm taking it. I don't know what will happen in the future, with my health or production, but I do know that myself and my whole family are going to live comfortably for the rest of my life no matter what happens from here on out. To me there's a lot that can be said for that. Look at what happened with Bill Hall. Fortunately for him, he took the money when he had a chance. Look what happened with Jean Segura, although it looks like he'll be okay now. Sure, there's always the risk you'll end up leaving a ton of money on the table if you sell yourself low, but are you really going to sacrifice a lot of life quality if you only make 50M in your career instead of 200M? I'm a little more leery on Perez. I guess I'm just not crazy about low OBP guys. I think some perspective is needed on him, since his 102 OPS+ pretty much shows that his 'breakout ' year is just kind of an average player year. But I do appreciate the value he brings to us as a super utility player.

I think the difference between those that want to deal him right away and those who think you can wait is the presumed value you'd get for him this offseason. If you can get a legit prospect for Garza in the offseason, then yes, do it in a heartbeat. I just don't think he's going to bring that back after a nice half season that followed a horrible full season and a half season long injury. If you can't get a decent prospect for him, then you might as well hold onto him for another half season since we don't need to shed his salary and you're not losing any value on him even if he does plummet again. Why? He's not any part of the future, and he's blocking younger options. A legitimate prospect is not a possibility for Garza IMO. If you can get someone to take most of his salary off our hands and send us whatever in return, I'd do it. There is $17.5M in potential savings here for a move that makes us no worse, to dump a guy who won't be here when we're relevant again anyway. That's a great salary shed. Just because we can afford to pay the rest of the salary doesn't mean we should do it if we have a chance to get out of it. Think of it this way, if Garza was a free agent this offseason and required a 2 year/$17.5M contract to bring him to Milwaukee, would anyone want us to sign him to that? I would think not, it would make zero sense for where we're at.

Well, I'd probably be willing to go somewhere like 6/46. Assume half a million for next year, and I would say 4.5/7/10 for arbitration right now. Then I'd go 12M each with his two FA years to put him at 6/46. I realize that's still a heavy discount off what he'd be worth as a FA, but that's the tradeoff for him to take it now this early. Big discount for us, lifetime financial security for him, with the risks gone.

I have to disagree. Villar is an excellent sell high candidate. I agree that you are not going to get a king's ransom(top 25 prospect), but I think that at least one team would make a worth while offer and give 2 or 3 nice pieces. It would would absolutely kill me if Villar regresses in 2017 and is once again worth Cy Sneed. For good or for bad Villar reminds of a bit of Scott Podsednik. I don't know, Scotty Po was (28?) when we traded him and coming off a pretty mediocre season compared to what Villar is doing now. Villar is still young, the upside is still there. I have I think Villar is pretty legit. One thing that really has stood out to me is how consistent he has been. There haven't been a whole lot of peaks and valleys. He hasn't has extended slumps. For the most part he's been within 5 points or so of .300 the entire season. I think the BABIP indicates some regression is in order, but with his speed and improving LD rate, he should still hold steady in the .350-.375 range. All in all I think he'll end up being a .280 hitter with a .350 or so OBP, an .800 OPS, and the potential to be a 20 HR/50 SB player every year. I think his defense will improve - never going to be above average, but I think he has the skillset and range to at least come back closer to average. Couple that with his versatility and that's a very valuable player. Many expect Villar to regress but it rarely gets acknowledged that as good as he is, he has parts of his game that could be significantly improved, mainly, defense. It's plausible that at his age that he could improve his weaknesses and be even more valuable than he is now.

Arcia must be very close to losing his prospect status.

I'm fine with locking Villar up long-term, but just like Lucroy did, he needs to accept a heavily discounted deal to sign him long-term. I agree with what Monty said. A deal for Villar now isn't going to be at market value, otherwise you may as well go year to year with him. You look for something here that's mutually beneficial. If Villar is for real, we'll get one of our core players locked up at a substantially discounted rate compared to market value. The benefit for Villar is that with one swipe of the pen he never has to worry about money again, even if he regresses or gets hurt. 6/40 sounds about right to me. Off the top of my head I don't recall exactly where Lucroy was at in his career when he was extended or what he got.

I'm really not that interested in trying to move Villar right now. With his lack of history of this kind of success, I don't think the offers are going to match the value. Unless you can get a top 25 prospect for him, which you can't, I wouldn't move him.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/09/heymans-latest-white-sox-marlins-brewers-yankees-gurriel-saunders.html Interesting to see that Villar's breakout season has left other clubs wondering if we would be willing to deal Arcia. According to the link we are not entertaining such offers, which knowing Stearns I'm guessing is simply code for 'We're not actively looking to do that, we value this guy a ton, so you'll have to blow me away.' Would this be an avenue that should be considered? I don't blame Stearns for not wanting to pursue it, I don't want to trade Arcia either. At the same time, should an elite pitching prospect be involved in the discussion. ...it would be impossible not to listen. Starting pitching has long been our Achilles heel, and top pitching prospects aren't easy to come by. Of course, elite SS prospects don't grow on trees, either.

LOL...If Junior had spent half the energy running to first as he did waving in Arcia, he would have made it to 1st on the strikeout.

2nd blown call against us already in the 3rd, and replay can't fix this one.

Well that inning changed quickly.

Santana looks like he's never played an inning of RF in his career.

The thing about Suter and Woodruff, even with as nice of surprises as they've been, is that even if they do break into our rotation, they still have back of the rotation ceilings. We have no shortage of these types. They're nice to have, and keep you from having to fill out the bottom of the rotation in free agency, but they're not guys that are really going to move that needle from rebuilding to contention. Those potential front end of the rotation arms is something we still lack, for the most part, though we've gotten better there and guys like Hader and Ortiz give us hope. Wang might offer something there, but he's still a big wild card. I've been pleased with the direction we are headed, but I think some perspective is necessary. Not much has gone wrong for us in terms of what we really could have expected this year. Lucroy rebounded in a big way to recover his trade value. Braun's rebound has gone as good as we could have hoped. Davies and Guerra have outpitched expectations, and Villar, Perez, and to some extent Broxton have enjoyed breakout years. Thornburg has greatly surpassed expectations. You could say Jungmann and Peralta have disappointed, but in line with what we could have expected this year, the good has definitely outweighed the bad. And even with all that, we're on pace to be a 72-90 team. That's totally fine for the 2016 Brewers, but it's a long ways from contention, and we may not be as fortunate in finding breakout performers next season.

I agree there's going to be a lot of trialing going on in 2017, and I don't see it as a contending year. Who is coming up next year that is going to make a significant difference? Hader and Brinson, if we promote them aggressively. It's also probably too much to expect them to succeed at this level from the start - most likely they'll have some growing pains like Arcia. Even if Hader surpasses early expectations, you're still going to need some other things falling into place --- Peralta pitching as he is now, not as he was earlier this year -- a big rebound year from Nelson -- Jungmann surprising and becoming relevant again. Several of these things are going to have to fall into place just to cobble together a half decent rotation. Also keep in mind that our record this year includes all but the last month of Lucroy, Smith, and Jeffress, who we won't benefit from next year. The meat of our top 10 -- guys like Ortiz, Bickford, Diaz, Clark, and Ray are mostly guys still 2-3 years away. Anything can happen and teams can surprise, and so much can happen in a few years, but as of right now with the pieces we have at this moment I'd project 2019 to be our most realistic target for when we can expect to field a contending team. We're doing this right. It sucks to have to wait, but patience is key to this process.

If he can get his ERA under 4 before the end of the season, I could see someone being interested in taking him off our hands. However I think anyone expecting to get back anything other than salary relief is going to be disappointed. Maybe he'd fit as a throw-in on a Braun trade to the Dodgers.

Sometimes, lost in the talk of his errors and baserunning mistakes, it seems to get forgotten that Jonathan Villar has been really, really good for us this season.

Somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd post here. Nothing of value.

I think there's probably a lot more luck and circumstance associated with triples than any other hit. Billy Hamilton also has 3 this year, Starling Marte had 2 all of last season in a full season. They're rare.

A super utility player with Perez' versatility, even if he doesn't have a regular role, may be someone that plays 5 times a week anyway. A player like that also might allow for us to carry a shorter bench and extra bullpen arm.

Why? He's having too good of a season to DFA for a minimum salary guy. Stearns might not prefer him starting without wanting to DFA him out of spite to remove the option. Too good a season? I guess a below average OPS+ and slightly above 0 WAR is good for this team but are they actually going to bring him back next year? I'm guessing not. Why keep him on the roster then. I mean, I can't stand Nieuwenhuis starting as much as anyone, but it's more because like you said he isn't gong to be back, or shouldn't be, and we have young players that will be. But his WAR is a shade over 1, with a .732 OPS , outfield versatility and decent defense. He's a good 4th OFer. With the rosters having expanded and guys like Elmore having survived it I don't think we can really justify DFA'ing Kirk, much as I'd like to to get him out of the lineup.

Why? He's having too good of a season to DFA for a minimum salary guy. Stearns might not prefer him starting without wanting to DFA him out of spite to remove the option.