MNBrew

Where did you see that online? Link? Not questioning you, just curious to have a look.

I noticed that the full list of 20 on the Brewers' website does not yet include Shelby Miller. His deal must not be official yet. When it is, he'll be NRI #21.

I'd say chances are decent that Small makes his major league debut in 2020 and why not? He was the best pitcher in arguably the best college conference in 2019, and thoroughly dominated in his first 20 innings of pro ball and he turns 23 this month. He should start the year no lower than High A and quite possibly in AA. Actually it's been pretty normal that the Brewers have invited the previous summer's 1st round pick to ST as a non-roster guy. The idea is for the player to gain some exposure to big-league ST and for the coaches to see them in action. When they've done this, usually that guy is in the first batch of guys sent to minor-league camp. I couldn't dig back and justify it research-wise, but every spring I track who's in ST, who's cut, who's eventually added, etc., and I know I've written the prior year's top pick's name on multiple occasions -- and crossed them off usually with the first batch of cuts.

That consistent failure to capitalize on golden opportunities was a major flaw of last year's team --- all-or-nothing offense that was on the "nothing" side WAY too often. Heck, Moose & Grandal were putrid at driving in runners for a solid month after the All-Star game -- both solid if not dangerous hitters when they're on, but pretty useless when they weren't.

Trade for him to play a lot of 1B? I don't think so. 76 total appearances at 1B in the minors -- less than 20% of his total minor league defensive innings -- and 4.1 innings in the majors. He's a .238 career MLB hitter w/ a .319 OBP. Last year's numbers were sort of Grandal-esque, but overall it's too soon to know if that was an outlier or a new norm. I believe the Twins also signed him early this offseason to a nice extension. It's pretty clear he's a guy they're committed to building around.

I think the first question is "Should the Brewers trade for Max Kepler?" And I'd say "no" for the same reasons TJseven7 points out above. Kepler's a good player -- I definitely agree -- but he's sort of superfluous (at least not in terms of a need) on this roster. I also feel you're overvaluing him at least a bit. On top of that, I don't think he's worth Hader alone, period. Package a couple lesser parts with Hader & add some significant parts from the Twins? That may be something worth talking about.

IIRC, they outrighted him to AAA last year, so I believe an outright isn't possible without the chance of losing him to free agency or another team first.

Looks like Suter's going to be working in a longer-outing relief role: "Stearns says Brent Suter will be lengthened out to be ready for multiple innings but is being looked at as a reliever at this stage." link:

Can't hurt. Anything good out of him or anyone else in a similar spot is better than nothing.

A no-lose possibility with some positive qualities & track record (albeit not exactly glowing). He was decent with MN last year before they let him go. They turned over some okay pieces of their bullpen in quick succession last year & Morin was a roster casualty in that process. Folks here generally thought Morin was nothing special but at least solid, so his release was a bit surprising.

I'm not expecting anything, but I won't complain, either, if something good happens. ^^ I agree that in the past the timing's merely been positively coincidental, not intentional, though they've shown that if they've been close to a deal (was it Garza that year?), they certainly know the value of trying to get it across the finish line right before On Deck.

Well, that would be a good target if Lewis proves he can stick.

May not matter, but there's another whole week-plus before then.

Dyson is a FA who's out with an injury for 2020. Kintzler's been on 1-2 teams since he was last with the Twins and is also currently a FA. To the earlier comment, Arraez IS the Twins' starting 2B. He's not blocked by anyone.

Hoping for Kintzler if it's a FA. Trade? I have no idea -- neither what we'd give or what we'd get -- and I'd hope a solid SP gets added, too. Odds are SO long that we'll only use 5 starters.

My son & I were discussing this on Monday morning on the way to school. I told him my idea: I thought a strong deterrent for other teams, besides any fines & suspensions, would be to take away Houston's top 5 picks for 3 years. Obviously Rob Manfred liked his idea better, and he never asked my opinion. Modern media's/society's sensationalistic approach would be to "out" everyone involved. Oh, how do we ever love to fix the blame! I put more stock in how they're actually going to fix the problem. Yesterday's decision was the public message delivery. The rest doesn't have to be public -- or talk -- just strong, effective, & efficient actions. . . . The more public the process from here out, the longer the black eye lasts. Show us it's not about putting spin on the solution, just having a strong & effective solution.

Right. You listen in case you hear something that blows you away. Lacking that, I'd think most of those sorts of inquiries die on the vine pretty quickly.

All this discussion re: Hader is fun, if for no other reason than that he's one of 2-4 players (Yelich for sure, possibly Hiura & Woodruff) who might net a very significant return in a trade. But I keep coming back to this: Most of the Hader discussion on a national level over the past 1+ month is rooted in a single Ken Rosenthal tweet that the Brewers were listening on Josh Hader. He followed that, as I recall, with a little speculative commentary. Others have heard that, spun it, ran with it, whatever -- basically made it into a much bigger story than it was. But it all started with "The Brewers are listening on Josh Hader" -- and that's it. There's a huge difference between "listening on" and "shopping." Rosenthal said "listening on Hader." Others turned it into "shopping Hader," which was not the report. Haudricourt, among others (mainly local writers), noted that Stearns said that over the course of a winter, it's normal that they get calls on pretty much everyone on their roster. In other words, it seems very true that, technically, Stearns actually listens on everyone. All that indicates, though, is that other teams are interested in Brewers players, not that Stearns is looking to move them. Funny but somewhat expected how Rosenthal's tweet has created such a buzz. It's too bad, though, that others didn't see or heed the locally reported & factual 2nd part, which would've created a way different context.

If he ends up at San Antonio, at least there's the opportunity for him to continue to develop within our organization, and if he does and eventually becomes a better piece for the Brewers than he is at present (meaning that he was in his time here in 2019), then we'd still on the "up" end of the trade. . . . For as much as Nelson Cruz is "that" Nelson Cruz over the past decade, he was a waived Nelson Cruz by Texas at one point that NO teams claimed, then developed more and became "that" Nelson Cruz. I'm not saying that guarantees anything for Faria, but if we still have him, then there's a chance he might still turn into a net-positive.

If he ends up at San Antonio, at least there's the opportunity for him to continue to develop within our organization, and if he does and eventually becomes a better piece for the Brewers than he is at present (meaning that he was in his time here in 2019), then we'd still on the "up" end of the trade. . . . For as much as Nelson Cruz is "that" Nelson Cruz over the past decade, he was a waived Nelson Cruz by Texas at one point that NO teams claimed, then developed more and became "that" Nelson Cruz. I'm not saying that guarantees anything for Faria, but if we still have him, then there's a chance he might still turn into a net-positive.

Going after Dyson for this coming year is spending money for nothing -- literally. You must've missed that Dyson's out for all of 2020: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/11/sam-dyson-elects-free-agency.html

Going after Dyson for this coming year is spending money for nothing -- literally. You must've missed that Dyson's out for all of 2020: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/11/sam-dyson-elects-free-agency.html

I feel like that is letting them off the hook with a convenient excuse. "hey, we tried." I don't think they went in intending to "slash" payroll, but I do think they intended to spend less than most want them to spend. I'm not sure it's a "too long/rich for our blood" thing. There's a HUGE difference between "We don't have the money" vs. "That's not a prudent/efficient enough way to spend our money." I'm convinced with Stearns the issue is the latter. Really, I think it's in this: Stearns' "plate discipline" when it comes to money both now & down the road might be one of his greatest strengths, and he's just not going to spend excessively now if it too greatly risks screwing over his chances at wise decisions when "right' opportunities are there due to a lack of needed payroll flexibility. When the golden opportunity presents itself, the guy strikes -- and is able to because his "plate discipline" in prior decisions has ensured that he'll be able to. On a couple other points in the discussion: - Massive increase in the franchise's valuation means ZERO to the revenues on which a business has to operate. ZERO. My house might have increased in value by $100k in the 25 years since I bought it, but the day-to-day expenses I can absorb still come down to my take-home pay -- and all the more so if it has only increased with the times moderately at best, and I still have to figure out how to help pay for my one kid's college tuition and another kid's wedding . . . . so cash in my pocket hasn't changed for the better, the cost of raising my family has only increased, and I'm supposed to not worry about it -- and freely blow actual cash that I don't have -- because my house is worth loads more even though that's nothing in terms of cash until I try to sell it? Nope. - Last year's payroll jumped considerably because of the golden chances to get Moose & Grandal on one-year deals. Sustaining that while lacking those types of golden acquisitions, let alone blowing by that by another $10-20M for anything other than an elite player or two, is risky in the short term and potentially very dangerous for the health of the franchise in terms of sustainability in the long-term given the current realities of team revenues. - Moose was pretty darn good in several stretches. The numbers clearly show he was a plus-guy on the whole. But let's not forget, either, that he had some ugly, ugly stretches. I'm NOT going to miss the stretches of 2-3 weeks at a time where he couldn't buy a hit or drive in a runner in scoring position (remember him & Grandal in the month-plus after the All-Star break?) -- those times when all he ever seemed to do was strike out or pop up weakly on the IF (esp. those to the 1B or 3B in foul territory, oh did those ever suck) time and time again!!! - I'm very wary of the Gyorko signing today -- doesn't light my fire at all -- especially in light of the numerous other seemingly "non-sexy" moves they've made so far. However, there's over a month to ST, we have no idea what be obtainable in trades, and Stearns is our GM. Do those last 3 points justify blind faith in light of viable concerns? No, of course not. But at minimum those 3 factors mean there are some very rational justifications for keeping an open mind. - It's still so easy to get hung up on headlines at this time of year. I get disappointed by un-exciting Brewers hot stove "seasons." Lord knows, lots of other franchises are good at "winning the winter." But I've watched this over enough years to know that winning the winter guarantees precious little when it comes to the regular season. I'll take a winter like this if in the end we actually end up with a good shot at going deep in the playoffs more years than not.

I feel like that is letting them off the hook with a convenient excuse. "hey, we tried." I don't think they went in intending to "slash" payroll, but I do think they intended to spend less than most want them to spend. I'm not sure it's a "too long/rich for our blood" thing. There's a HUGE difference between "We don't have the money" vs. "That's not a prudent/efficient enough way to spend our money." I'm convinced with Stearns the issue is the latter. Really, I think it's in this: Stearns' "plate discipline" when it comes to money both now & down the road might be one of his greatest strengths, and he's just not going to spend excessively now if it too greatly risks screwing over his chances at wise decisions when "right' opportunities are there due to a lack of needed payroll flexibility. When the golden opportunity presents itself, the guy strikes -- and is able to because his "plate discipline" in prior decisions has ensured that he'll be able to. On a couple other points in the discussion: - Massive increase in the franchise's valuation means ZERO to the revenues on which a business has to operate. ZERO. My house might have increased in value by $100k in the 25 years since I bought it, but the day-to-day expenses I can absorb still come down to my take-home pay -- and all the more so if it has only increased with the times moderately at best, and I still have to figure out how to help pay for my one kid's college tuition and another kid's wedding . . . . so cash in my pocket hasn't changed for the better, the cost of raising my family has only increased, and I'm supposed to not worry about it -- and freely blow actual cash that I don't have -- because my house is worth loads more even though that's nothing in terms of cash until I try to sell it? Nope. - Last year's payroll jumped considerably because of the golden chances to get Moose & Grandal on one-year deals. Sustaining that while lacking those types of golden acquisitions, let alone blowing by that by another $10-20M for anything other than an elite player or two, is risky in the short term and potentially very dangerous for the health of the franchise in terms of sustainability in the long-term given the current realities of team revenues. - Moose was pretty darn good in several stretches. The numbers clearly show he was a plus-guy on the whole. But let's not forget, either, that he had some ugly, ugly stretches. I'm NOT going to miss the stretches of 2-3 weeks at a time where he couldn't buy a hit or drive in a runner in scoring position (remember him & Grandal in the month-plus after the All-Star break?) -- those times when all he ever seemed to do was strike out or pop up weakly on the IF (esp. those to the 1B or 3B in foul territory, oh did those ever suck) time and time again!!! - I'm very wary of the Gyorko signing today -- doesn't light my fire at all -- especially in light of the numerous other seemingly "non-sexy" moves they've made so far. However, there's over a month to ST, we have no idea what be obtainable in trades, and Stearns is our GM. Do those last 3 points justify blind faith in light of viable concerns? No, of course not. But at minimum those 3 factors mean there are some very rational justifications for keeping an open mind. - It's still so easy to get hung up on headlines at this time of year. I get disappointed by un-exciting Brewers hot stove "seasons." Lord knows, lots of other franchises are good at "winning the winter." But I've watched this over enough years to know that winning the winter guarantees precious little when it comes to the regular season. I'll take a winter like this if in the end we actually end up with a good shot at going deep in the playoffs more years than not.

If the 2019 version of Gyorko continues into this year, at least he's also easy to move on from.