2018 Brewers Discussion - Yelich Signing on Page 45

[sdn40]

I know baseball trades are sometimes more than whats on the surface, but doesn't Stearns find .300 hitters in his sleep for almost nothing ? Why trade for one that's 30 years old ? Isn't that just about the time Braun started to slide ? It also doesn't seem like a 'major' trade to me unless we 'majorly' overpay. No reason not to trust Stearns though. I'm confused.

Did we have a single .300 hitter as a regular hitter last year?

I agree on most of your Abreu assessment, though.

Well yea - I embellished a little. Just seems weird

[Kerb Hohl]

I think I’d feel confident about Abreu being close to what his bat has been the last few years for the next 2. It wouldn’t be a long commitment. But I just don’t know if that’s worth it, given he is not a great defender and the Cubs night now have Darvish.

[wichmae]

Thames was not very good after April. Jesus came out of nowhere, who knows what he'll do next year. Our offense was terrible the second half of the year. You'd be giving up 1 prospect for two years of a hitter that good and consistent as Abreu, it's clearly a good value trade. Being the team probably isn't really at a title window without other moves, I don't know if it's worth doing at this time. But the trade values of it would clearly be in MKE's favor. Most deals of this nature have one top level guy like Brinson and 2-3 more with him. I'd guess that CWS would demand more but I'm not surprised MKE fans overvalue prospects.

Keep in mind Brinson has always been hurt too.

No way in hell should the Brewers trade their #1 prospect for a 1st baseman. Id rather move Shaw to 1st and overpay Moustakas

Trades for guys of Abreu's level usually require 3-4 guys, one on Brinson's level as a prospect. You're clearly winning this trade. I'd guess if you asked a Sox fan they'd say no way and expect much more back. Keep in mind if you're not winning you can also trade Abreu later.

But as Kerb said, you're not likely a contender right now so is it worth the hassle? I'm not sure. But as we see other stuff throwing around, trading Santana then signing Cain, etc. They clearly think they're in a spot to make moves and go for it so a winning value trade like this would likely be much easier than having all that stuff come together. And I know I'd rather hold onto Santana than Brinson.

They’re not trading Brinson for Abreu. If they wouldn’t include him for Quintana or Gray in a pennant race who are younger and same years of control as well as being a pitcher. They aren’t trading him for Abreu.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[DingleJerry]

No way in hell should the Brewers trade their #1 prospect for a 1st baseman. Id rather move Shaw to 1st and overpay Moustakas

Trades for guys of Abreu's level usually require 3-4 guys, one on Brinson's level as a prospect. You're clearly winning this trade. I'd guess if you asked a Sox fan they'd say no way and expect much more back. Keep in mind if you're not winning you can also trade Abreu later.

But as Kerb said, you're not likely a contender right now so is it worth the hassle? I'm not sure. But as we see other stuff throwing around, trading Santana then signing Cain, etc. They clearly think they're in a spot to make moves and go for it so a winning value trade like this would likely be much easier than having all that stuff come together. And I know I'd rather hold onto Santana than Brinson.

They’re not trading Brinson for Abreu. If they wouldn’t include him for Quintana or Gray in a pennant race who are younger and same years of control as well as being a pitcher. They aren’t trading him for Abreu.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Those deals weren't just him though, it was him and other prospects. Like the way most of these type of deals go. This discussion was him as the only prospect. That was also before he got hurt yet again. For Quintana, the Sox got one guy at Brinson's level of prospect plus 3 more. The top guy was rated top 10 prospect in all of baseball.

But again, this isn't something even being rumored. It was just a value discussion. Best to move onto something else. Likely this Santana trade triggering a bunch of other stuff.

[wichmae]

The point still stands though they didn’t want to move him. Like period. So why would they magically pivot from there 4 months later for a lessor player at a significantly lessor position. They won’t and this regime hasn’t shown they deviate from their path at all.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Turk Nowitzki]

I can't believe people want to send out prospects to get two years of Abreu at 1B. I don't get that one at all.

Also, that thread on BF.net has devolved into some of the most insane short sighted trade ideas I've seen in awhile. I bet twirly is having a stroke reading some of the posts over there.

[DingleJerry]

The point still stands though they didn’t want to move him. Like period. So why would they magically pivot from there 4 months later for a lessor player at a significantly lessor position. They won’t and this regime hasn’t shown they deviate from their path at all.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

That was not the point. They did not want to trade him along with 3 other prospects. We have no idea if they would have traded him straight up for Quintana, my guess is they would have and the Sox would have laughed at that offer.

[DingleJerry]

I can't believe people want to send out prospects to get two years of Abreu at 1B. I don't get that one at all.

Also, that thread on BF.net has devolved into some of the most insane short sighted trade ideas I've seen in awhile. I bet twirly is having a stroke reading some of the posts over there.

It's one prospect, not prospects. Again, put this to a neutral board or Sox fans and they would laugh at getting just one top 30ish prospect back for Abreu. Abreu is going to get traded at some point and it will be for much more. Again, this isn't really even a legit thing being rumored, just a value discussion.

Best to move to the Santana scenarios which will involve giving up a 24 yr old who just had a great year (not a 23 yr old like Brinson who has done nothing so far and is hurt all the time) for a couple years of a pitcher and the right to overpay a 31 yr old OF in Cain who's probably not better than Santana is going forward.

[ReasonablySober]

Why are we having a discussion about moving our best prospect for a moderate upgrade at the least important position on the field?

[DingleJerry]

Why are we having a discussion about moving our best prospect for a moderate upgrade at the least important position on the field?

Abreu is more than a moderate upgrade at 1B. Thames was blah after April and Jesus came out of nowhere, who knows if he can repeat it. But again, it's really just a trade value discussion and I can't believe people don't realize how massive of a ripoff the trade would be to get Abreu for Brinson. You should do it in a second and sort it out later. You can flip him right away or then start trading Thames/Aguilar (since apparently ya'll think they're really good) for some other pieces.

And look at what the actually rumor mill is pumping out involving Santana as real possibilities from insiders. Our fans as I see here are completely against trading 23 yr old prospect (basically no matter) what who's always been hurt but totally ok with trading a 25 yr old who just had a great year at age 24 in the bigs and replacing him by overpaying a 31 yr old. And you're likely going to only get a couple years of a P back for Santana (just like a couple years of Abreu) and you're also going to have to add more prospects with Santana to get it done. Which is really more crazy?

[ReasonablySober]

Why are we having a discussion about moving our best prospect for a moderate upgrade at the least important position on the field?

Abreu is more than a moderate upgrade at 1B. Thames was blah after April and Jesus came out of nowhere, who knows if he can repeat it. But again, it's really just a trade value discussion and I can't believe people don't realize how massive of a ripoff the trade would be to get Abreu for Brinson. You should do it in a second and sort it out later. You can flip him right away or then start trading Thames/Aguilar (since apparently ya'll think they're really good) for some other pieces.

And look at what the actually rumor mill is pumping out involving Santana as real possibilities from insiders. Our fans as I see here are completely against trading 23 yr old prospect (basically no matter) what who's always been hurt but totally ok with trading a 25 yr old who just had a great year at age 24 in the bigs and replacing him by overpaying a 31 yr old. And you're likely going to only get a couple years of a P back for Santana (just like a couple years of Abreu) and you're also going to have to add more prospects with Santana to get it done. Which is really more crazy?

Trading a 23 year old five tool CF with six years of control for a 30 year old first baseman with two years of control. That is the more crazy thing here.

[DingleJerry]

Why are we having a discussion about moving our best prospect for a moderate upgrade at the least important position on the field?

Abreu is more than a moderate upgrade at 1B. Thames was blah after April and Jesus came out of nowhere, who knows if he can repeat it. But again, it's really just a trade value discussion and I can't believe people don't realize how massive of a ripoff the trade would be to get Abreu for Brinson. You should do it in a second and sort it out later. You can flip him right away or then start trading Thames/Aguilar (since apparently ya'll think they're really good) for some other pieces.

And look at what the actually rumor mill is pumping out involving Santana as real possibilities from insiders. Our fans as I see here are completely against trading 23 yr old prospect (basically no matter) what who's always been hurt but totally ok with trading a 25 yr old who just had a great year at age 24 in the bigs and replacing him by overpaying a 31 yr old. And you're likely going to only get a couple years of a P back for Santana (just like a couple years of Abreu) and you're also going to have to add more prospects with Santana to get it done. Which is really more crazy?

Trading a 23 year old five tool CF with six years of control for a 30 year old first baseman with two years of control. That is the more crazy thing here.

Than trading the proven 25 yr old with 5 years of control for 2-3 years of a P and then handing 20 mil per to an OF in his age 34 and 35 season while also giving up other prospects? Not even close.

I'll wait for the Abreu trade to go down and see how much they get back and I'm in fear of what might happen here with this Santana trade.

[ReasonablySober]

Abreu is more than a moderate upgrade at 1B. Thames was blah after April and Jesus came out of nowhere, who knows if he can repeat it. But again, it's really just a trade value discussion and I can't believe people don't realize how massive of a ripoff the trade would be to get Abreu for Brinson. You should do it in a second and sort it out later. You can flip him right away or then start trading Thames/Aguilar (since apparently ya'll think they're really good) for some other pieces.

And look at what the actually rumor mill is pumping out involving Santana as real possibilities from insiders. Our fans as I see here are completely against trading 23 yr old prospect (basically no matter) what who's always been hurt but totally ok with trading a 25 yr old who just had a great year at age 24 in the bigs and replacing him by overpaying a 31 yr old. And you're likely going to only get a couple years of a P back for Santana (just like a couple years of Abreu) and you're also going to have to add more prospects with Santana to get it done. Which is really more crazy?

Trading a 23 year old five tool CF with six years of control for a 30 year old first baseman with two years of control. That is the more crazy thing here.

Than trading the proven 25 yr old with 5 years of control for 2-3 years of a P and then handing 20 mil per to an OF in his age 34 and 35 season while also giving up other prospects? Not even close.

Sure, because it's pitching and not a first baseman.

[DingleJerry]

Trading a 23 year old five tool CF with six years of control for a 30 year old first baseman with two years of control. That is the more crazy thing here.

Than trading the proven 25 yr old with 5 years of control for 2-3 years of a P and then handing 20 mil per to an OF in his age 34 and 35 season while also giving up other prospects? Not even close.

Sure, because it's pitching and not a first baseman.

It was our offense with a huge assist from Thames in collapsing after April that killed the team last year. And we haven't had a good 1B since 2012 yet you're acting like you can just pick them up for nothing. before catching lightning in a bottle last year. I hope they can replicate it this year in a pretty strict platoon, and it's not like I'm looking to upgrade the spot as I'd be comfortable letting them ride and seeing what happens. But if you were handed such a ripoff of a trade you'd be foolish not to do it and sort it out later. This is just classic loving the idea of a prospect clouding judgement to value him over the guy who just put up a 275/375ish with 30 HR season in the bigs. Brinson was bad in 2016, good in 2017 in AAA but couldn't make contact in the bigs, then gets hurt again. He's not some 'lock' prospect by any means.

Again, keep this all in mind when we're watching Cain his .245 getting paid 18 mil per year three years from now. I just hope they hold tight on Santana unless they get a massive haul.

[DingleJerry]

How about just trading Brinson for pitching instead of this elaborate route they're looking at? Keep the guy you know is good. Or are we not ok with trading him until he's proven good and no longer a prospect like we are with Santana.

[ReasonablySober]

Or you could simply sign Logan Morrison to play 1st, deal Santana for pitching, and replace your worst defensive OF for your best.

[DingleJerry]

Or you could simply sign Logan Morrison to play 1st, deal Santana for pitching, and replace your worst defensive OF for your best.

Definitely rather just roll the dice with our platoon than Morrison. Look at his career before last year, he has flop written all over him. Sure, if we were still playing Yuni Betancourt at 1B I'd take Morrison but I'd rather just see what happens with our guys than committing anything to him. Long term I'm curious if Santana can move to 1B after Thames/Jesus are gone after this year or next. I've looked before but haven't found any info on it as a possibility or if he's played it in the past and failed, etc.

You could also simply keep trying to sign the many available SPs.

Also, I just ran threw Baseball America prospect list and they have Phillips and Harrison also in the top 100 and keep in mind recent top 10 pick Corey Ray as OF prospects.

I think in your scenario you'd have an OF of Braun, Philips, Brinson. Two rookies with contact problems and an injury prone guy, could be a huge weakness. Unless that also included signing Cain with Morrison.

More or less, i'm fine just rolling with what they have on offense. The two rookie OFs split time in CF and Braun's days off should give them enough ABs. Should be a generally deep team other than a question at 2B right now, but there's options for respectable production there and I'm sure they're still talking to Walker. It will still have it's contact issues like last year but every spot in the order is a competent bat (assuming the rookies hold their own). The Abreu talk was purely about how good of a trade value it would be and would give you options to figure things out from there and subsequently about how much we value the idea of prospects.

[Kerb Hohl]

On the Abreu front - the point remains that we platooned basically Abreu's production at 1B in 2017, had one of the best pitchers in baseball (his 2017 performance) and likely will not have that luxury for some or all of the year in Nelson...and still finished well behind the Cubs. I'm not dealing for Jose Abreu to fall short of the Cubs.

[Kerb Hohl]

Or you could simply sign Logan Morrison to play 1st, deal Santana for pitching, and replace your worst defensive OF for your best.

Definitely rather just roll the dice with our platoon than Morrison.

LoMo would be part of a platoon. Just shy of an .800 OPS career vs. RHP in tougher stadiums and he clearly at least figured something out last year.

.905 vs. RHP last year.

[DingleJerry]

LoMo has flop written all over him imo. Still struck out a ton last year but got some extra HRs, been poor contact his whole career but got lucky with some HRs last year. And a type like him is what hurts MKE right now with the poor contact ability. Really he's just like Thames, except we have Thames signed cheap already.

255/340ish like we got last year is not the same as 300/360ish and the Brewers end is heavily skewed by Thames absurd April. And factor in that Abreu is consistent at it so can trust it much more than the obvious histories of our guys that question whether it's legit. I'm sure I'm not the only that noticed after April that Thames can't hit a breaking ball. And yet again, this is not even my point. It was just a trade value discussion and that if it was real that you'd be ripping them off in the trade giving you all kinds of options.

the simplest route is to just take the money they seem to want to dump on 31 yr old Cain and just buy a pitcher with it instead, even if it is a bit more money rather than this elaborate risky route that's being thrown out as a legit scenario.