MNBrew

Michael Fulmer draws less attention than some of the other arms, but he could be a decent & affordable addition in a '21-'22 Boxberger kind of way.

I also don't view the absence of FA spending as a deficit. The key is to make moves in an effort to improve the club, which they've done, just solely via trades so far. It seems obvious that some kind of signing will happen,* but I'm expecting it to be a BP addition (or two) that's "Boxberger-ish" in magnitude (quietly solid even if seemingly unspectacular)... although bringing in a proven IF bat also seems feasible. (*To me, Blake Perkins & his MLB contract doesn't count since he's not yet played in the bigs.)

That "weapon" had in 9 RBIs in the last 2 months of the season when a playoff spot was there for the taking -- 17 RBIs total in the 2nd half -- and hit .168 for the season with RISP -- from a guy whose lineup role was more than anything about driving in runs. He hit decently those two months but after following so many games so closely, the seemingly strong numbers others have cited seem more hollow than meaningful because he sure sucked most of the time when it mattered. Counsell would often "go righty-vs-left formula" & bring him in as a PH for Jace Peterson to face a LHP and most of the time he was a total dud, a sure out. More than anything, I'd love for Urias to prove he can be the lineup mainstay and strong contributor he looked like he could become when we traded for him. Maybe it'll happen. He's 25, strong hit tool & success in the minors, and could still improve -- I agree with all that -- but his performance overall is more in the realm of "just a guy" than anything compelling.

There's a lot we don't know & there's a lot of winter left. The Brewers are also rarely the team that tries to "win the offseason," just the season, and their track record the past 5 season in that regard is a lot better than plenty of the teams who spend gratuitously more and snag a lot of headlines this time of year.

For those who look at certain stats & wonder why there's doubt about Urias as our 3B, I'll tell you exactly why: For as good as some of his overall numbers may look, he ended the season completely horribly and wasn't exactly a clutch hitter. To wit: in 47 Aug/Sept/Oct games -- 9 RBIs w/ RISP for the year -- .168/.263/.337/.600 career .239 hitter w/ a .728 OPS (2022: .239 BA & .729 OPS) I'm not an advanced stats person, but between watching/listening/following a lot of those games & THOSE numbers, the eyeball test (or the aural equivalent) was fairly ugly. NONE of those numbers inspire a lot of confidence or strike much fear in opposing pitchers -- let alone indicate with great certainty that that position should be set for this coming year (or beyond). I'd love a 3B upgrade. I have NO suggestions about who those realistic/viable/worthwhile upgrades could be (if nothing else, for total lack of thought on the topic). To me, Urias is plenty serviceable but hardly very compelling.

Agreed. Pre-Hader trade, more than a few of the seemingly low-glitz bullpen additions of the past few years -- guys that hardly seemed interesting or impactful at the time -- turned out to be more significant than we thought they would be, guys like Boxberger, Strickland, Hughes, Phelps, Pomeranz, even Gott, to name a few, not to mention starters like Miley and Lyles.

Taylor hits for some decent power -- good for the occasional grand slam, too -- and is a solid defender, but in general he sure doesn't hit great the rest of the time. His career line of .241/.303/.442/.756 is pretty ordinary at best & tells me he doesn't walk much and if he doesn't hit the ball over the wall, he doesn't hit too much.... though also oddly, on a team that couldn't buy many clutch hits all September, he hit .296 that month and also hit .311 with RISP for the year. I don't love the idea of him as our starting RF, though I don't mind him so much as our 4th OF. If nothing else, having him on the roster is good, cost-effective insurance if any of the young guys struggle or if Yelich or Winker are DHing or injured.

I'd heard the same thing for Payamps. However, I think you're off on the logic behind your assessment of Yeager. It's a possibility, but far from the only one. Lots of decent prospects were Rule 5 eligible. Not being drafted very well could indicate that other teams don't view the player as likely enough to stick on a major league roster for the whole year. Yeager split 2022 between A+ & AA and had decent results. I can't imagine there are many guys who finally make it to AA for part of the year & aren't on (or added to) a team's 40-man roster who are likely good shots to stick in the majors for all of the next year.

Missing the GIF/MEME reference, but B.J. Surhoff is very much still alive.

If the season started tomorrow & the current roster is what we had, I'd be very concerned. But it's December 8th and the picture's very incomplete. Lots of FAs are still available. Plenty of moves remain to be made. I'll hold any judgement 'til the season's a lot closer. On a superficial level, I get the concerns. But Renfroe & Wong, for their pluses, were not spectacular by any means and had some glaring deficiencies. I like that the Brewers at least were smart to hang onto them long enough to parlay them into other assets -- "assets" plural in both cases.

My priority/hope list is similar. I think adding a reliever is inevitable. Would they bring back Boxy or Rogers? Both make me uncomfortable in different ways, but they might also be the right quality/price combo that could pan out nicely, especially if Rogers can get back to pre-'22 form. The catching combo of Caratini, Feliciano, & Henry seems like that one that could prove anywhere from pleasantly serviceable to utterly worthless. I think the only way they don't make some move at catcher is if they make enough other significant moves at other offensive positions. Bringing back Narvaez would equate to a non-move, but given how worthless most of his at-bats were, especially anything clutch, I'd rather see him go elsewhere. I have no inklings or specific hopes of where they go for an impactful RH bat, but I agree they need to do something meaningful. Hopefully that move (and anything else related) helps bring some clarity to the rest of the lineup & depth chart.

Wong was a solid dude but was never particularly solid on offense -- good stretches, yes, and some decent stats. However, I was SO tired of him so rarely being a clutch hitter. He's a well-known name, primarily from being a regular on good Cardinals teams and for his defense. But I don't think he was particularly special for the Brewers. I don't think the Brewers ever had thoughts of him playing for them in 2023. Picking up the option was a way to get something respectable for him instead of nothing. For everyone that doesn't care much for the Winker/Toro return.... on one hand, I get that notion, though I also tend to want to view the positive potential of both guys. On the other hand, I'm sure if LA, SF, etc. were offering better, Arnold would've taken the better deal -- but he took this deal, which says every other team's offer wasn't as good.

This falls in the same category as all those old years of Hader rumors. They've shown interest -- so what? In all reality, it most likely means absolutely nothing. This feels exactly like the same sort of speculation we've heard for years re: the Mets & especially the Yankees, when they reportedly show interest in half of the good players in baseball and the reporters who follow them (and especially their fans) often discuss it as though it automatically gives them the inevitable right to acquire the player -- and usually for their fringe guys, B- prospects, & other miscellaneous roster crud.

Link? Was it an actual reporter reporting or a fan site speculating/wishing/proposing?

I liked Suter the dude and pre-2022 pitcher. He was mostly ordinary at best, and sometimes very much not helpful, in 2022, in my opinion. I would've been surprised if they'd kept him, even at a lesser cost.

Several scattered thoughts: It's possible some of the role player types on that list agree to terms for less than the projected $$ to avoid the risk of getting non-tendered. It's kind of funny to read how some folks don't want Perdomo or Gustave back when the projected cost totals about $2M between the two of them. I could see them not returning, but in a perfect world, at worst they're depth, not awful, quite cheap, and I don't know how you ensure better replacements for the same money. I think Suter's days here could be done. He had some good moments this year but too many not-good ones. If Narvaez isn't back (I'm one who doesn't want him), short of acquiring a better C, I'm not sure how you don't bring Caratini back. Brosseau was one of our most productive bench players. I'm not sure he's a starter, but I want him back. I kind of like FA Jace Peterson coming back, too, but his last month or two was a step back to his first season or more here, which raises questions. So many of our bats were just plain awful in the 2nd half. Sure, we were 10th in runs scored, but way too often we were no threat whatsoever. When a single & a walk are your best rally for several innings & you are horrid hitting at all & esp. w/ RISP, it's a huge problem. The bullpen collapses made the inept offense even more painful. The sum of all that seems to point to a decent number of changes. I hate lots of Rob Manfred's rules. Among them, banning the shift is ridiculous to me. However, at the same time, shame on so many hitters for not being any better at "hitting it where they ain't!"

Glad someone else caught the Surhoff omission, too.... and that I read to the end of the thread to avoid redundancy.

Can someone fix the spelling in the thread title? "Too early...," the correct spelling being the one with two o's.

In Woodruff & Burnes, the Brewers have two very high-end commodities that are not easily replaced. To me, those two are guys untouchables..... unless you're planning to rebuild, which makes little if any sense at this time. They have enough SP depth that I think the right type of trade could be a possibility, something along the lines of Grisham/Davies-for-Urias/Lauer. To me, that's the sort of trade to look for, and I'd be willing to put Small or Houser in that deal. Hiura HAS to figure out how to put his bat on the ball better. If Stearns & Co. feel he can't, then I think you trade him while others might still think he has value/potential. If Stearns & Co. feel they need to move on from Wong, then Hiura has to play everyday until he flat-out proves he either can or can't rediscover his rookie form. In other words, this part-time thing for Hiura isn't giving him enough of a chance. Narvaez has me perplexed. When he's good, he's solid. I'm not sure if he can be that guy enough of the time. In short, I think the roster could use some tweaking, but not major overhauls. I love the suggestions about giving rookies shots, but having at least somewhat proven Plan B's is essential (think role players like Jace Peterson, Mike Brosseau, etc.) if the rookies are flailing miserably. I agree that with Hader & Cain gone, there are resources to pay the guys who are still here. Assuming they do that, I think any hitters they bring in need to be good contact/batting average types because the endless stream of unproductive outs is tiring and painful. I know I bring this up on occasion, but one of the cool innovations back in the late '90s the Brewers were onto for a couple years was a machine that pitched tennis balls at something like 125 mph. The good-hitting guys of that era (Cirillo, Loretta, Vina, etc.) used that a lot, and it helped them a lot. I wish the current Brewers would try that thing. It certainly couldn't hurt.

It's been noted several times (over several seasons) that the Brewers weren't out there trying to trade Hader. But Stearns says all the time (when asked) that they listen. Obviously most of the time they don't act because they're either not interested in moving the player in question or because the offer isn't compelling. It's somewhere between curious & bothersome that the best closer in baseball right now nets only the return Hader did, yet Juan Soto is worth half of a high-end farm system's top 10 prospects. Deciding afterward that Lamet wasn't worth keeping makes the "worthwhile" return for Hader seem even more suspect. I'm a pretty relentless Brewers optimist, but this one's got me concerned. It wouldn't surprise me if the team's reeling a bit because of the Hader trade. Even though the past 4 games have featured blown leads & mostly no late-inning offense (heck, hardly any late-inning hits, whereas Pittsburgh had few problems with clutch hitting), it wouldn't surprise me to see this team under Counsell pull it together because it's still a good team with a lot of good, proven relievers, Hader's absence notwithstanding.

High A to the majors is a considerable leap in time & development. Given the promise is more in the tools than the totality of his results, it seems to me there's a greater likelihood that he becomes the next Valerio de los Santos than the next Brandon Woodruff. I hope for Kelly's sake that he does turn into the MLB pitcher we were hoping he'd be for the Brewers.

I think I get your point about how often the rules don't apply to athletes. It seems like we've seen that sort of thing a lot of times over the years. I'm no fan of Matt Bush's rap sheet or the kinds of choices he made. But clearly the rules did apply to Matt Bush. He broke the rules, got busted, and paid a heavy price. No one guaranteed let alone gift-wrapped for him a 2nd chance at a baseball career after prison. He was lucky to have that opportunity, and what came after came with no guarantees. Everything from that point on, he had to earn. To his credit, he did. To me, it's not about a redemption story. He went through what he went through. He's done well since and presumably made good choices. My hope is that now that he's a Brewers reliever, he continues to do both those things and that the Brewers are the beneficiaries.

Some people become worse human beings as they go through life, different than who they were (or seemed to be). Some people do or go through awful things and eventually become better human beings. As Matt Bush paid a steep price for his actions, I hope he's learned from that and the latter is applicable to him. For now, he's a Brewers reliever and I hope he continues to have a good year on the mound. Mark Mathias was a decent organizational guy but not an outstanding player -- it would be fun to see him have some success in Texas. If Kelly has MLB success some day, more power to him ... as long as it's always for an AL team or against other NL Central teams.

I've read enough of the hype on Kelly. I'd rather not see him go based on that, but his actual production in games isn't very good outside of his first year of Rookie ball. High K's, sure, but only about a 2:1 K:BB ratio. I get the love of great tools, but so far it's not exactly translating. Remember the love for Cy Sneed, the guy we gave Houston for Villar? Lots of promise and even made the bigs... but the results sure weren't good. On the flip side, Matt Bush looks like a good acquisition for the bullpen. Mathias is just an AAAA guy. Kelley is at least a few years away. This looks like the right kind of deal for right now.

I didn't like how he profiled coming in and I'm not disappointed he's gone. I get the logic of signing him. Unfortunately, there was nary a trace of lightning in the bottle this time.