2017 Trade Rumors Thread

[wichmae]

Verlanders K/BB is a career worst. His BABIP is the highest its been since 2014. He's also projected to have the worst WAR of his career. His pitch contact percentage is the highest its been since 2007 and has a ridiculous 35% hard hit ball ratio (this is actually insanely high). Again, theres a reason he's basically free and I want him no where near the Brewers.

For comparisons sake the **** show Wily Peralta has less hard hit balls.

[Kerb Hohl]

Suter should be moved to the pen

If Suter has an option next year, I'm fine with him just being the jack-of-all-trades sitting there in AAA. He's not a massive asset in the bullpen because he's not a guy that is lethal against lefties. He'd be a useful long relief guy that can do relief or emergency start. He's just a solid pitcher that I don't hate seeing as the listed starter if some injuries happen.

The numbers dont agree with you though. He's fared quite a bit better as a starter until he runs through order for 3rd time. Suter's biggest statistical weakness is high leverage situations and walks. He gives up a .418 BAA in high leverage situations. The way the numbers look across the board his best role is probably a 4-5 inning starter and again youre talking about someone who can do this at 500K for two more seasons after this one.

The problem is that you're judging a guy on his first handful of MLB starts when the book isn't fully out or he's maybe had some luck (his HR/9 and HR/FB rates are lower than you'd expect). That's downright scary. The league already owns him the 3rd time around the order...what if they figure out another one of his pitches and now he's not even good the 2nd time around?

How many 27-year-old guys that did not necessarily dominate the minors, do not have overpowering stuff, and do not have a high groundball percentage actually stick as mainstays/good players in the majors? Quintana, maybe? A few other guys that learned a new pitch? It's probably only going to get worse from here. We've already played this game of "surprise" with Jungmann who did not have dominant stuff in the minors and it was shocking [actually very expected] when the league figured him out and destroyed him.

I saw your post about jumping the gun and overpaying for vets. 60 million for Verlander is exactly that. A vet in his age 35 and 36 season making 1/4 of the teams payroll is overpaying unless theyre an ace. YOu have two players on the roster making over 50 million a year in Verlander and Braun who arent even remotely performing at even an above average win contribution.
Plus add in that the starting pitching on this team should be one of tha last positions we funnel massive financial assets in to. This pen is a nightmare. Our second base situation is a mess that needs a long term solution. We need to grow and nurture our upper level young talent to maximize their potential, and need to pray that Travis Shaw doesnt regress (the first base platoon as well).

If Mark says he's going to pay $110-120 million/year for the roster when the team is competing, I don't care what % is going where. We've got $50-60 million next year to fill like 5-6 25-man roster spots if in theory that is what Mark would do, so I doubt we will.

Other than Neil Walker being somewhat young (32) in free agency, the long-term solution at 2B is probably Huira and he'll be here 2019 at the earliest. Dubon interests me but I'm not looking at him as a stud. I do not like what Kinsler or Phillips bring but we've probably got some time to figure something out and that is exactly why I was willing to let Villar try to figure it out all year.

As for the bullpen, I agree. If there was a way to overpay every decent reliever there is out there for 1-2 year contracts, I'm all in.

For what Verlander will get you on the field you could look at Estrada, Cashner, Cahill, Lance Lynn, Chatwood, or Alex Cobb at an absolute fraction of that 28 mil per year. Ending baseball games are a problem for this team. Not starting them.

Most of those guys will require a 4 or 5 year contract and starts to eat into years where we actually need the money. That's why Verlander is a little bit appealing to me, though again, don't take what I'm saying too far as this is not something I am strongly advocating.

[mlloyd10]

Verlanders K/BB is a career worst. His BABIP is the highest its been since 2014. He's also projected to have the worst WAR of his career. His pitch contact percentage is the highest its been since 2007 and has a ridiculous 35% hard hit ball ratio (this is actually insanely high). Again, theres a reason he's basically free and I want him no where near the Brewers.

Last 7 starts - 1.97 ERA, BAbip - .229, 9.5 K's per 9 innings, 2.87 walks per 9 innings(career average)

We are not saying give up the farm for him. If he cost us nothing and we just take on the money, you do it and dont think twice.

[Kerb Hohl]

Verlanders K/BB is a career worst. His BABIP is the highest its been since 2014. He's also projected to have the worst WAR of his career. His pitch contact percentage is the highest its been since 2007 and has a ridiculous 35% hard hit ball ratio (this is actually insanely high). Again, theres a reason he's basically free and I want him no where near the Brewers.

For comparisons sake the **** show Wily Peralta has less hard hit balls.

1. Let me explain this yet again that I am not a gigantic proponent of Verlander in his current state. He would probably still be one of our best pitchers, though, knowing his 2nd half buildup.

2. BABIP does somewhat relate to getting hit hard but is probably more of the fact that his defense sucks. Granted, they do have the 9th best defense per fangraphs but it still probably has a bit to do with that.

3. He was lights out last year in the 2nd half and looks like he is again right now. I think the xFIP and FIP might be a bit tricked by what he's actually bringing because he's sported an ERA around 2 last year and this year in the 2nd half. He is stranding runners and striking out a ton, meaning he's probably bringing out his A+ stuff when he really needs it. It would be an odd coincidence if he suddenly became extremely lucky in the 2nd half every year late in his career.

[coolhandluke121]

I agree with the general premise that you can't be totally confident in most of the available vets being much of an upgrade at all. When Yuniesky Betancourt is your 1b, you can say "get me James Loney" with a straight face. But when your team is more balanced, as opposed to the stars and scrubs phenomenon we've had so often in the past, whom do you replace? Even Sogard and Villar aren't nearly as awful as Yuni was, at least not as platoon 2b's.

[wichmae]

35% Hard hit ball rate is absurd. It means his defense is actually helping him avoid being incredibly worse. 35% of all his batted balls have an exit velo of 95 or better. Thats a **** ton. almost 50% of them 85 or better. Sure he's stranding 75% of runs but he's putting a ton on with walks (4bb/9) and when he does get hit he gets smoked. His advanced metrics are awful. Hes at a outside of the zone swing % of 31% and only throwning pitches in the zone 43%. And generating swings on 48% of those pitched. People are laying off the hard to hit pitches and hammering the meatballs/ His strike zone contact is at a career high at 86%. Meaning 86% of all pitches he actually gets in the zone are getting exit velo's 95+ 35% of the time. These are all signs of a guy who has been ridiculously lucky by having his pitches being hit hard right at one of the better defenses in baseball.

[wichmae]

If Suter has an option next year, I'm fine with him just being the jack-of-all-trades sitting there in AAA. He's not a massive asset in the bullpen because he's not a guy that is lethal against lefties. He'd be a useful long relief guy that can do relief or emergency start. He's just a solid pitcher that I don't hate seeing as the listed starter if some injuries happen.

The numbers dont agree with you though. He's fared quite a bit better as a starter until he runs through order for 3rd time. Suter's biggest statistical weakness is high leverage situations and walks. He gives up a .418 BAA in high leverage situations. The way the numbers look across the board his best role is probably a 4-5 inning starter and again youre talking about someone who can do this at 500K for two more seasons after this one.

The problem is that you're judging a guy on his first handful of MLB starts when the book isn't fully out or he's maybe had some luck (his HR/9 and HR/FB rates are lower than you'd expect). That's downright scary. The league already owns him the 3rd time around the order...what if they figure out another one of his pitches and now he's not even good the 2nd time around?

How many 27-year-old guys that did not necessarily dominate the minors, do not have overpowering stuff, and do not have a high groundball percentage actually stick as mainstays/good players in the majors? Quintana, maybe? A few other guys that learned a new pitch? It's probably only going to get worse from here. We've already played this game of "surprise" with Jungmann who did not have dominant stuff in the minors and it was shocking [actually very expected] when the league figured him out and destroyed him.

I saw your post about jumping the gun and overpaying for vets. 60 million for Verlander is exactly that. A vet in his age 35 and 36 season making 1/4 of the teams payroll is overpaying unless theyre an ace. YOu have two players on the roster making over 50 million a year in Verlander and Braun who arent even remotely performing at even an above average win contribution.
Plus add in that the starting pitching on this team should be one of tha last positions we funnel massive financial assets in to. This pen is a nightmare. Our second base situation is a mess that needs a long term solution. We need to grow and nurture our upper level young talent to maximize their potential, and need to pray that Travis Shaw doesnt regress (the first base platoon as well).

If Mark says he's going to pay $110-120 million/year for the roster when the team is competing, I don't care what % is going where. We've got $50-60 million next year to fill like 5-6 25-man roster spots if in theory that is what Mark would do, so I doubt we will.

Other than Neil Walker being somewhat young (32) in free agency, the long-term solution at 2B is probably Huira and he'll be here 2019 at the earliest. Dubon interests me but I'm not looking at him as a stud. I do not like what Kinsler or Phillips bring but we've probably got some time to figure something out and that is exactly why I was willing to let Villar try to figure it out all year.

As for the bullpen, I agree. If there was a way to overpay every decent reliever there is out there for 1-2 year contracts, I'm all in.

For what Verlander will get you on the field you could look at Estrada, Cashner, Cahill, Lance Lynn, Chatwood, or Alex Cobb at an absolute fraction of that 28 mil per year. Ending baseball games are a problem for this team. Not starting them.

Most of those guys will require a 4 or 5 year contract and starts to eat into years where we actually need the money. That's why Verlander is a little bit appealing to me, though again, don't take what I'm saying too far as this is not something I am strongly advocating.

Estrada Cashner and Cahill will not get contracts over 4 years. Cobb is more of a "guy" and would generate a FA market close to what we saw from Jason Hammel and I would gladly give Lynn a 5 year deal but again why on earth do we need to sign a starter?

[Kerb Hohl]

I agree with the general premise that you can't be totally confident in most of the available vets being much of an upgrade at all. When Yuniesky Betancourt is your 1b, you can say "get me James Loney" with a straight face. But when your team is more balanced, as opposed to the stars and scrubs phenomenon we've had so often in the past, whom do you replace? Even Sogard and Villar aren't nearly as awful as Yuni was, at least not as platoon 2b's.

Exactly.

Guessing aggressively that the Brewers keep Jeffress and Torres (probably not worth their $, but might be fine in the context of payroll), Hughes, Villar, and Vogt...here is what you have:

I'm going to say they'll keep guys like Broxton when they'll pretty clearly trade them, probably not for somebody that is much more highly paid to clear up the logjams.

If I'm guessing at arby, I'll put ~

C (2) - ~$5m and $500k Vogt/Pina
1B (2) - $5m and $500k Thames/Aguilar
2B - ~$3m Villar
3B - $500k Shaw
SS - $500k Arcia
OF (5) - $20m, $500k x 4 Braun/Broxton/Santana/Phillips/Brinson

SP (5) - $5m, ~$5m, ~$4m, $500k, $500k Garza/Anderson/Nelson/Davies/Woodruff
SP/RP (3) - $500k x 3 Hader/Guerra/Suter
RP (4) - ~2m, ~$4m, ~4m, ~$3m Hughes/Torres/Jeffress/Knebel

That's about $65 million tied up in 24 players. If you non-tender Hughes, Jeffress, and Torres of which none are really important to me you can chop off about 10 million and open up 3 new spots. Vogt also may not be worth $5 million. Villar is probably another $3 million if you just cut ties with him.

The point is that you really only have to improve 2B and RP. SP can be improved and you can bump guys down or get creative with that. You theoretically have $50 million to play with if Mark wants to spend. We're not going to replace any other position other than maybe catcher, but the options to improve aren't growing on trees at catcher.

So if you can even marginally improve 2B, SP, and RP and not have any money that bleeds into 3-4 years from now, you should do it if Mark has already earmarked $ for 2018.

[wichmae]

Verlanders K/BB is a career worst. His BABIP is the highest its been since 2014. He's also projected to have the worst WAR of his career. His pitch contact percentage is the highest its been since 2007 and has a ridiculous 35% hard hit ball ratio (this is actually insanely high). Again, theres a reason he's basically free and I want him no where near the Brewers.

Last 7 starts - 1.97 ERA, BAbip - .229, 9.5 K's per 9 innings, 2.87 walks per 9 innings(career average)

We are not saying give up the farm for him. If he cost us nothing and we just take on the money, you do it and dont think twice.

Actually no you dont and this is why he didnt get claimed and theres very little market for him. WIth how Washington, Boston, NYY, LAD, and especially Baltimore all in dire need of starters there was no market. Its because he just isnt as good as people think he is and his advanced stats back up all of that information.

[Kerb Hohl]

The numbers dont agree with you though. He's fared quite a bit better as a starter until he runs through order for 3rd time. Suter's biggest statistical weakness is high leverage situations and walks. He gives up a .418 BAA in high leverage situations. The way the numbers look across the board his best role is probably a 4-5 inning starter and again youre talking about someone who can do this at 500K for two more seasons after this one.

The problem is that you're judging a guy on his first handful of MLB starts when the book isn't fully out or he's maybe had some luck (his HR/9 and HR/FB rates are lower than you'd expect). That's downright scary. The league already owns him the 3rd time around the order...what if they figure out another one of his pitches and now he's not even good the 2nd time around?

How many 27-year-old guys that did not necessarily dominate the minors, do not have overpowering stuff, and do not have a high groundball percentage actually stick as mainstays/good players in the majors? Quintana, maybe? A few other guys that learned a new pitch? It's probably only going to get worse from here. We've already played this game of "surprise" with Jungmann who did not have dominant stuff in the minors and it was shocking [actually very expected] when the league figured him out and destroyed him.

I saw your post about jumping the gun and overpaying for vets. 60 million for Verlander is exactly that. A vet in his age 35 and 36 season making 1/4 of the teams payroll is overpaying unless theyre an ace. YOu have two players on the roster making over 50 million a year in Verlander and Braun who arent even remotely performing at even an above average win contribution.
Plus add in that the starting pitching on this team should be one of tha last positions we funnel massive financial assets in to. This pen is a nightmare. Our second base situation is a mess that needs a long term solution. We need to grow and nurture our upper level young talent to maximize their potential, and need to pray that Travis Shaw doesnt regress (the first base platoon as well).

If Mark says he's going to pay $110-120 million/year for the roster when the team is competing, I don't care what % is going where. We've got $50-60 million next year to fill like 5-6 25-man roster spots if in theory that is what Mark would do, so I doubt we will.

Other than Neil Walker being somewhat young (32) in free agency, the long-term solution at 2B is probably Huira and he'll be here 2019 at the earliest. Dubon interests me but I'm not looking at him as a stud. I do not like what Kinsler or Phillips bring but we've probably got some time to figure something out and that is exactly why I was willing to let Villar try to figure it out all year.

As for the bullpen, I agree. If there was a way to overpay every decent reliever there is out there for 1-2 year contracts, I'm all in.

For what Verlander will get you on the field you could look at Estrada, Cashner, Cahill, Lance Lynn, Chatwood, or Alex Cobb at an absolute fraction of that 28 mil per year. Ending baseball games are a problem for this team. Not starting them.

Most of those guys will require a 4 or 5 year contract and starts to eat into years where we actually need the money. That's why Verlander is a little bit appealing to me, though again, don't take what I'm saying too far as this is not something I am strongly advocating.

Estrada Cashner and Cahill will not get contracts over 4 years. Cobb is more of a "guy" and would generate a FA market close to what we saw from Jason Hammel and I would gladly give Lynn a 5 year deal but again why on earth do we need to sign a starter?

Most of the best teams in baseball have 7 or 8 good MLB pitchers on their roster and just creatively work them in or are back down to 4 or 5 due to injury. I'm personally not counting on Suter or Guerra. They're fine if they're our 6th/7th/8th option but I'd also be fine if they were emergency options in AAA or just not on the roster (hopefully traded for a small piece).

Estrada may still cost $10-15 million for one season and looks like he's worse than Verlander at this point. Ditto on Cahill.

I'm not a major fan of it being Verlander but I think we could squeeze in an upgrade in the rotation if the only cost is $ and especially if they flip Garza for something else useful or just don't pick up the option (they probably still should pick it up).

[Kerb Hohl]

Verlanders K/BB is a career worst. His BABIP is the highest its been since 2014. He's also projected to have the worst WAR of his career. His pitch contact percentage is the highest its been since 2007 and has a ridiculous 35% hard hit ball ratio (this is actually insanely high). Again, theres a reason he's basically free and I want him no where near the Brewers.

Last 7 starts - 1.97 ERA, BAbip - .229, 9.5 K's per 9 innings, 2.87 walks per 9 innings(career average)

We are not saying give up the farm for him. If he cost us nothing and we just take on the money, you do it and dont think twice.

Actually no you dont and this is why he didnt get claimed and theres very little market for him. WIth how Washington, Boston, NYY, LAD, and especially Baltimore all in dire need of starters there was no market. Its because he just isnt as good as people think he is and his advanced stats back up all of that information.

I'm as big of an advanced metrics guy as the next but Verlander had a 5.2 WAR last year and if he closes out strong again this year probably will put up over a 4 WAR.

I'd be surprised if Brent Suter amasses a whole lot more than 5 WAR in his entire career. That will all depend if he latches on as a #5 starter somewhere or not.

His velocity is still mostly there (slider is randomly down but going back up) and it's pretty clear that he brings his A+ stuff in the 2nd half now.

Verlander's ERAs in the 2nd half are 2.80, 1.96, and 2.00 in the past 2 years plus this partial 2nd half. That's an extreme coincidence if suddenly he gets lucky enough to put up fluky dominant numbers 3 years in a row.

He comes with risk but he's a #4 starter in the 1st half and a #1/#2 in the 2nd half. The risk is if you'll get that the next 2 years as he ages.

[wichmae]

The problem is that you're judging a guy on his first handful of MLB starts when the book isn't fully out or he's maybe had some luck (his HR/9 and HR/FB rates are lower than you'd expect). That's downright scary. The league already owns him the 3rd time around the order...what if they figure out another one of his pitches and now he's not even good the 2nd time around?

How many 27-year-old guys that did not necessarily dominate the minors, do not have overpowering stuff, and do not have a high groundball percentage actually stick as mainstays/good players in the majors? Quintana, maybe? A few other guys that learned a new pitch? It's probably only going to get worse from here. We've already played this game of "surprise" with Jungmann who did not have dominant stuff in the minors and it was shocking [actually very expected] when the league figured him out and destroyed him.



If Mark says he's going to pay $110-120 million/year for the roster when the team is competing, I don't care what % is going where. We've got $50-60 million next year to fill like 5-6 25-man roster spots if in theory that is what Mark would do, so I doubt we will.

Other than Neil Walker being somewhat young (32) in free agency, the long-term solution at 2B is probably Huira and he'll be here 2019 at the earliest. Dubon interests me but I'm not looking at him as a stud. I do not like what Kinsler or Phillips bring but we've probably got some time to figure something out and that is exactly why I was willing to let Villar try to figure it out all year.

As for the bullpen, I agree. If there was a way to overpay every decent reliever there is out there for 1-2 year contracts, I'm all in.



Most of those guys will require a 4 or 5 year contract and starts to eat into years where we actually need the money. That's why Verlander is a little bit appealing to me, though again, don't take what I'm saying too far as this is not something I am strongly advocating.

Estrada Cashner and Cahill will not get contracts over 4 years. Cobb is more of a "guy" and would generate a FA market close to what we saw from Jason Hammel and I would gladly give Lynn a 5 year deal but again why on earth do we need to sign a starter?

Most of the best teams in baseball have 7 or 8 good MLB pitchers on their roster and just creatively work them in. I'm personally not counting on Suter or Guerra. They're fine if they're our 6th/7th/8th option but I'd also be fine if they were emergency options in AAA.

Estrada may still cost $10-15 million for one season and looks like he's worse than Verlander at this point. Ditto on Cahill.

I'm not a major fan of it being Verlander but I think we could squeeze in an upgrade in the rotation if the only cost is $ and especially if they flip Garza for something else useful or just don't pick up the option (they probably still should pick it up).

Garza at 5 million is a better option than Verlander at 28. Hell Estrada at 10 is better than lighting 60 mil on fire. I just dont understand how this isnt easy to see. He's one of the luckiest pitchers in baseball right now. Add in a somewhat shoddier defense and a more hitter friendly park than Comerica and its a disaster were stuck with for $60 mil. Just like the disaster in LF were stuck with. We need to stop being stupid with vets and use in house options who have the ability to match or be better than wasted dead contracts.

[wichmae]

Last 7 starts - 1.97 ERA, BAbip - .229, 9.5 K's per 9 innings, 2.87 walks per 9 innings(career average)

We are not saying give up the farm for him. If he cost us nothing and we just take on the money, you do it and dont think twice.

Actually no you dont and this is why he didnt get claimed and theres very little market for him. WIth how Washington, Boston, NYY, LAD, and especially Baltimore all in dire need of starters there was no market. Its because he just isnt as good as people think he is and his advanced stats back up all of that information.

I'm as big of an advanced metrics guy as the next but Verlander had a 5.2 WAR last year and if he closes out strong again this year probably will put up over a 4 WAR.

I'd be surprised if Brent Suter amasses a whole lot more than 5 WAR in his entire career. That will all depend if he latches on as a #5 starter somewhere or not.

His velocity is still mostly there (slider is randomly down but going back up) and it's pretty clear that he brings his A+ stuff in the 2nd half now.

As weve seen with Barnes Velo means nothing if youre getting tattooed. Villar 3.2 WAR last year. His advanced metrics said he was going to nose dive and he did. YOu cant ignore the numbers.

[Kerb Hohl]

Estrada Cashner and Cahill will not get contracts over 4 years. Cobb is more of a "guy" and would generate a FA market close to what we saw from Jason Hammel and I would gladly give Lynn a 5 year deal but again why on earth do we need to sign a starter?

Most of the best teams in baseball have 7 or 8 good MLB pitchers on their roster and just creatively work them in. I'm personally not counting on Suter or Guerra. They're fine if they're our 6th/7th/8th option but I'd also be fine if they were emergency options in AAA.

Estrada may still cost $10-15 million for one season and looks like he's worse than Verlander at this point. Ditto on Cahill.

I'm not a major fan of it being Verlander but I think we could squeeze in an upgrade in the rotation if the only cost is $ and especially if they flip Garza for something else useful or just don't pick up the option (they probably still should pick it up).

Garza at 5 million is a better option than Verlander at 28. Hell Estrada at 10 is better than lighting 60 mil on fire. I just dont understand how this isnt easy to see. He's one of the luckiest pitchers in baseball right now. Add in a somewhat shoddier defense and a more hitter friendly park than Comerica and its a disaster were stuck with for $60 mil. Just like the disaster in LF were stuck with. We need to stop being stupid with vets and use in house options who have the ability to match or be better than wasted dead contracts.

Hypothetical situation: Brewers are a dominant team with a low payroll and have an opening/hole in the outfield but are solid everywhere and a very low payroll.

In 2019, Bryce Harper says "I'll come for one season at $60 million to chase a title." Mark OKs the expense. Is your response, "No, I think Matt Joyce at 1 year, $4 million is more efficient?"

That's an extreme example but the point I'm trying to make. If Mark has earmarked a $100-110 million payroll for the next 2 years...I would like to get creative and spend it better than Verlander...but given the small amount of positions we can upgrade at, how are you going to spend that $ without having it bleed into 2020 and beyond?

If the Brewers have their entire roster set of 24 guys but could use another pitcher and your options are Cahill at 2 years, $18 million or Verlander at 2/$56...you're gonna take Cahill?

I also added above that it would be an insane coincidence if Verlander put up Cy Young numbers 3 straight seasons in the 2nd half. I wouldn't call that the "luckiest pitcher in baseball."

[Kerb Hohl]

Actually no you dont and this is why he didnt get claimed and theres very little market for him. WIth how Washington, Boston, NYY, LAD, and especially Baltimore all in dire need of starters there was no market. Its because he just isnt as good as people think he is and his advanced stats back up all of that information.

I'm as big of an advanced metrics guy as the next but Verlander had a 5.2 WAR last year and if he closes out strong again this year probably will put up over a 4 WAR.

I'd be surprised if Brent Suter amasses a whole lot more than 5 WAR in his entire career. That will all depend if he latches on as a #5 starter somewhere or not.

His velocity is still mostly there (slider is randomly down but going back up) and it's pretty clear that he brings his A+ stuff in the 2nd half now.

As weve seen with Barnes Velo means nothing if youre getting tattooed. Villar 3.2 WAR last year. His advanced metrics said he was going to nose dive and he did. YOu cant ignore the numbers.

Verlander's 2nd half from 2015-2017 now has 37 games in it and he is dominant (ERA around 2, ~.550 OPS against, K/9 is 9+). You really think the batted ball luck is enough that he randomly is on par with Max Scherzer and Kluber for those halves? If it was another pitcher I'd think it was funky that but it's Justin Verlander who has multiple Cy Youngs and pretty clearly may just save his best stuff for later in the season at this age.

WAR is an advanced metric, silly. It's an aggregate of a bunch of them. I can buy a fluky WAR from lucky BABIP and such for Villar...but Verlander has been churning out a 3-5 WAR even in his downturn seasons.

I agree that the batted ball hard hit % is something that I'd look at but Robbie Ray, Chris Archer, Greinke, Cobb, Porcello all have higher % of hard hit balls. deGrom is right behind him. It's not the tell-all in this situation. The lowest hard hit % guys don't correlate to the best pitchers. Jon Lester leads the league in lowest.

All things considered I'd obviously rather have a guy giving up less hard hit %, but there are guys clearly thriving when getting hit hard.

[Kerb Hohl]

This is my favorite sports fan trope. "He's gonna be overpaid!"

If you're a contending team and the cap/ownership allows and the contract is short it is completely different.

If in theory Mark has truly OK'ed the Verlander $, you're not "lighting $60 million on fire" by taking it on...rather, you're putting $40-50 million into the ownership group's pocket by passing on it because I'm not sure anyone else we'd be able to spend on in the next 2 offseasons.

I can buy the idea that he's simply not that good anymore (I disagree on some of the points as we've debated) but the cost means almost nothing to me.

[coolhandluke121]

I agree with the general premise that you can't be totally confident in most of the available vets being much of an upgrade at all. When Yuniesky Betancourt is your 1b, you can say "get me James Loney" with a straight face. But when your team is more balanced, as opposed to the stars and scrubs phenomenon we've had so often in the past, whom do you replace? Even Sogard and Villar aren't nearly as awful as Yuni was, at least not as platoon 2b's.

Exactly.

I think we're using the premise to draw different conclusions though. You're saying you may as well overspend for marginal potential upgrades at the few positions where they might have an opening, whereas I would say they should save all their money for guys who are clearly massive upgrades. I would hate to spend big money on someone who ends up on the bench behind Suter or Guerra. I would continue to penny-pinch and maybe offer Kershaw or Harper the biggest contract ever, and then try to "settle" for Machado or Keuchel if that doesn't work - all while still having 8-figure slots available to fill some bullpen holes. The starting pitchers in particular are intriguing because of the premium on having aces in the playoffs.

ETA: Never devalue financial flexibility. It always matters. You can't say $50m+ is enough money to spend on free agents so we may as well pay Verlander. If the Brewers finish strong, why not have another $25m to spend and maximize their chances of contending next season? It's all about Verlander's outlook, and I don't think it's very promising. Guys that age almost never are now that the steroid era is over.

[Kerb Hohl]

I agree with the general premise that you can't be totally confident in most of the available vets being much of an upgrade at all. When Yuniesky Betancourt is your 1b, you can say "get me James Loney" with a straight face. But when your team is more balanced, as opposed to the stars and scrubs phenomenon we've had so often in the past, whom do you replace? Even Sogard and Villar aren't nearly as awful as Yuni was, at least not as platoon 2b's.

Exactly.

I think we're using the premise to draw different conclusions though. You're saying you may as well overspend for marginal potential upgrades at the few positions where they might have an opening, whereas I would say they should save all their money for guys who are clearly massive upgrades. I would hate to spend big money on someone who ends up on the bench behind Suter or Guerra. I would continue to penny-pinch and maybe offer Kershaw or Harper the biggest contract ever, and then try to "settle" for Machado or Keuchel if that doesn't work - all while still having 8-figure slots available to fill some bullpen holes. The starting pitchers in particular are intriguing because of the premium on having aces in the playoffs.

I'd absolutely save my dough for massive upgrades. However, 2 issues:

1. Almost none are available in upcoming offseasons save for maybe Machado but I REALLY doubt it.

2. Verlander in this example is a 2-year deal. If he tanks it's as if we didn't sign him. If Machado is washed up in the 3rd year of his 7-year deal, not only will be be not a great player, but we'll start to feel the strain on the payroll once we're paying Arcia, Nelson, Shaw, etc.

[Kerb Hohl]

ETA: Never devalue financial flexibility. It always matters. You can't say $50m+ is enough money to spend on free agents so we may as well pay Verlander. If the Brewers finish strong, why not have another $25m to spend and maximize their chances of contending next season? It's all about Verlander's outlook, and I don't think it's very promising. Guys that age almost never are now that the steroid era is over.

I do think that adding Verlander if a few other signings or moves are made might cause a bit of strain in 2019 but I doubt it.

We've got 15-20 guys that either are on the team early in their rookie deals or positions that will be filled by them after for the next few years. The crunch won't happen until 2020 or 2021.

There might be better ways to fill the $50-60 million to spend in '18 and '19 offseasons like overpaying for bullpen help, but I'm not sure if having Verlander on the books in '19 would impede much either.

I will say that I'm not necessarily a giant advocate of Verlander but there is a very small pool of players that will cost little to no prospects that upgrade somewhere that we could use an upgrade is all I'm saying.

[wichmae]

I'm as big of an advanced metrics guy as the next but Verlander had a 5.2 WAR last year and if he closes out strong again this year probably will put up over a 4 WAR.

I'd be surprised if Brent Suter amasses a whole lot more than 5 WAR in his entire career. That will all depend if he latches on as a #5 starter somewhere or not.

His velocity is still mostly there (slider is randomly down but going back up) and it's pretty clear that he brings his A+ stuff in the 2nd half now.

As weve seen with Barnes Velo means nothing if youre getting tattooed. Villar 3.2 WAR last year. His advanced metrics said he was going to nose dive and he did. YOu cant ignore the numbers.

Verlander's 2nd half from 2015-2017 now has 37 games in it and he is dominant (ERA around 2, ~.550 OPS against, K/9 is 9+). You really think the batted ball luck is enough that he randomly is on par with Max Scherzer and Kluber for those halves? If it was another pitcher I'd think it was funky that but it's Justin Verlander who has multiple Cy Youngs and pretty clearly may just save his best stuff for later in the season at this age.

WAR is an advanced metric, silly. It's an aggregate of a bunch of them. I can buy a fluky WAR from lucky BABIP and such for Villar...but Verlander has been churning out a 3-5 WAR even in his downturn seasons.

I agree that the batted ball hard hit % is something that I'd look at but Robbie Ray, Chris Archer, Greinke, Cobb, Porcello all have higher % of hard hit balls. deGrom is right behind him. It's not the tell-all in this situation. The lowest hard hit % guys don't correlate to the best pitchers. Jon Lester leads the league in lowest.

All things considered I'd obviously rather have a guy giving up less hard hit %, but there are guys clearly thriving when getting hit hard.

Ill leave the argument as you want something different thatn I want. The last thing Ill say is that he isnt missing bats in the zone and isnt getting swings outside of the zone, and when he doesnt miss bats he's getting hit very hard. On top of that he's walk 4 per 9. Sure he has great 2nd half number but you arent just buying the 2nd half. Youre getting this 2nd half and two more years where the metrics are trending in the direction you dont want them too. If I have 28 mil to spend openly next season and the following I can think of at least 5 different ways to allocate those funds elsewhere. Ive said my peace and will read your response but wont beat the dead horse back and forth. Good convo though. I respect well thought our posts...