Offseason 2016/17 Thread - Scooter Cut
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- crkone
- RealGM
- Posts: 28,583
- And1: 9,337
- Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Time to put Braun at first.
Code: Select all
o- - - \o __|
o/ /| vv`\
/| | |
| / \_ |
/ \ | |
/ | |
Re: RE: Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,875
- And1: 19,675
- Joined: Feb 07, 2010
Re: RE: Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
crkone wrote:Time to put Braun at first.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if that was the plan.
Sent from my SM-G930V using RealGM mobile app
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 98,734
- And1: 35,085
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Or Eric Thames.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- crkone
- RealGM
- Posts: 28,583
- And1: 9,337
- Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Code: Select all
Year Age AgeDif Tm Lg Lev Aff G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB
2015 28 -0.5 NC KBO Fgn 142 595 472 130 180 42 5 47 140 40 8 103 91 .381 .497 .790 1.288 373 7 13 0 7 11
2016 29 NC KBO Fgn 121 525 432 117 137 29 3 40 118 13 4 74 103 .317 .425 .676 1.101 292 2 12 0 7 6
Code: Select all
o- - - \o __|
o/ /| vv`\
/| | |
| / \_ |
/ \ | |
/ | |
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- BigDee
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,934
- And1: 1,349
- Joined: Jul 11, 2006
- Location: Wisconsin
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- LUKE23
- RealGM
- Posts: 72,298
- And1: 6,244
- Joined: May 26, 2005
- Location: Stunville
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Thames is garbage.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 98,734
- And1: 35,085
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
LUKE23 wrote:Thames is garbage.
We could pay $15 million over three seasons for somewhat unknown garbage, or $10 million next year for known garbage.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- LUKE23
- RealGM
- Posts: 72,298
- And1: 6,244
- Joined: May 26, 2005
- Location: Stunville
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Honestly, in a sunk year in terms of contending, fine with paying one year at $10M. No reason to really add 2018/2019 salary for a guy who isn't the long-term solution at 1B. I mean, great, he crushed the Korean League, his MLB numbers through 700 PA are God f'ing awful. Like pre-breakout Gomez OBP.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- humanrefutation
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 30,544
- And1: 14,114
- Joined: Jun 05, 2006
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
Meh. I don't really get the contract, but whatevs.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- Kerb Hohl
- RealGM
- Posts: 34,569
- And1: 4,172
- Joined: Jun 17, 2005
- Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
LUKE23 wrote:Honestly, in a sunk year in terms of contending, fine with paying one year at $10M. No reason to really add 2018/2019 salary for a guy who isn't the long-term solution at 1B. I mean, great, he crushed the Korean League, his MLB numbers through 700 PA are God f'ing awful. Like pre-breakout Gomez OBP.
Maybe he figured out OBP a little bit in Korea. He probably is not great, but it's possible that he's a lefty power bat off the bench if we're contending in 2019.
If we make a bunch of signings that burn money, I'll be concerned. For now, I'll just trust that there is a hunch from Stearns or it's basically a small sunk cost during rebuild at worst.
Look at where Hernan Perez and Jonathan Villar were at age 23/24. Sometimes power hitters develop late and maybe Thames' 25-year-old season, he wasn't ready yet.
If Braun is dealt, it's entirely possible that the Brewers will have about ~$20-25 million TOTAL on the books for 2018 and 2019 and only $30-35 in 2017. This doesn't mean you should burn money, but you can take a $5 million/year hunch if you think you have one.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,656
- And1: 1,242
- Joined: Apr 15, 2008
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
I think we owe it to Stearns to allow this to play out. If they see something they like in Thames who are we to sh*t all over it when almost all of the "garbage" they picked up last year ended up working out.
Misery loves company
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
- wichmae
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,726
- And1: 1,031
- Joined: Feb 22, 2005
- Location: Milwaukee
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Next Up Winter meetings DEC 4th)
At the end of the day it really isnt a large monetary commitment for the potential upside. You give it a season and if he flames out and cant hit MLB pitching and you are only one the hook for 11 mil plus the buyout and you have a platoon LH bench guy. If it works it really works.
I would rather spend the opportunity cost on younger players and I think the Guerra breakout is jading some of these acquisitions with the lightening in a bottle ideology. To me waiver claiming Jon Singleton might have been a better approach with him in a platoon with Walker to see what you got going into spring. Thames does have more upside in the move itself than some of the other more recent ones though.
The opprotunity cost to me is a touch higher than the money cost. Either way its splitting hairs. Roll the dice and see if it works. I dont hate the move.
I would rather spend the opportunity cost on younger players and I think the Guerra breakout is jading some of these acquisitions with the lightening in a bottle ideology. To me waiver claiming Jon Singleton might have been a better approach with him in a platoon with Walker to see what you got going into spring. Thames does have more upside in the move itself than some of the other more recent ones though.
The opprotunity cost to me is a touch higher than the money cost. Either way its splitting hairs. Roll the dice and see if it works. I dont hate the move.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- Turk Nowitzki
- RealGM
- Posts: 32,659
- And1: 9,944
- Joined: Feb 26, 2010
- Location: on the Hellmouth
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
I would love to know if this is the first time in MLB history that a player has been DFA'd after hitting 40 HR's in a season. I have a tough time imagining that has ever happened before.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- MickeyDavis
- Global Mod
- Posts: 92,957
- And1: 45,618
- Joined: May 02, 2002
- Location: The Craps Table
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
Stearns is just floating along with roster filler for the next couple of years anyway. If/when our prospects are contributing THEN moves like this matter a lot more.
I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,332
- And1: 6,853
- Joined: Sep 23, 2007
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
I think we owe Stearns the benefit of the doubt when it comes to scouting these guys, but I'm concerned about some of these older pick-ups. They've done okay with them, but if you keep doing stuff like this the law of averages will catch up with you and you'll have a lot more Kirks than Guerras, and then you have to start talking about the opportunity cost as wichmae said.
Remember when I kept arguing that they were trying harder to win than most people here assumed? This reinforces my concerns. Of course they're stocking the farm, trading veterans who won't be part of the future, and avoiding huge free agent deals. All teams in their position should. But within that paradigm, there's a subtle yet important distinction between fully embracing multiple 90-loss seasons and being reluctant to give up on having a puncher's chance at winning 85 games during the rebuild, and given their history I think it's reasonable to question which side of that line they're on.
An agenda like this won't be obvious in free agency or trades, but there are some subtle signs. Every Kirk, Blazek, Geltz, and Scahill begs the question, especially when it comes to not protecting guys from the rule 5 draft. This reveals something about their priorities. The other thing is trades. We know they're making plenty of trades that they have to make or that are obviously in their favor. What we don't know is how many trades they've passed up. What was on the table for guys like Braun, Carter, Nelson, or Guerra last season? Just because they make the trades they obviously should doesn't mean they're not passing up some good ones at the same time.
Remember when I kept arguing that they were trying harder to win than most people here assumed? This reinforces my concerns. Of course they're stocking the farm, trading veterans who won't be part of the future, and avoiding huge free agent deals. All teams in their position should. But within that paradigm, there's a subtle yet important distinction between fully embracing multiple 90-loss seasons and being reluctant to give up on having a puncher's chance at winning 85 games during the rebuild, and given their history I think it's reasonable to question which side of that line they're on.
An agenda like this won't be obvious in free agency or trades, but there are some subtle signs. Every Kirk, Blazek, Geltz, and Scahill begs the question, especially when it comes to not protecting guys from the rule 5 draft. This reveals something about their priorities. The other thing is trades. We know they're making plenty of trades that they have to make or that are obviously in their favor. What we don't know is how many trades they've passed up. What was on the table for guys like Braun, Carter, Nelson, or Guerra last season? Just because they make the trades they obviously should doesn't mean they're not passing up some good ones at the same time.
Wut we've got here is... faaailure... to communakate.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 98,734
- And1: 35,085
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
The Brewers cut the league leader in home runs to sign a failed prospect, and I love it
Chris Carter out, Eric Thames in. This is catnip for baseball nerds, and it just might work.
Chris Carter out, Eric Thames in. This is catnip for baseball nerds, and it just might work.
If there’s a practical comparison to make, it’s not with any of the players listed above. No, the best comparison for what the Brewers might be hoping for is with Rich Hill, who was signed by the A’s for $5 million after four impressive September starts the year before. They gambled their limited money and were rewarded with premium prospects on the other side.
That’s what the Brewers want to do, but the contract is just long enough to give them a chance at using Thames for their own postseason hunt, should the stars align, and we all know that every team is potentially two or three years away from contending, regardless of how messed up they are. It’s a high-risk investment, but a team that’s trying to compete with the Cubs and Cardinals shouldn’t waste their time with municipal bonds, at least not entirely.
Of all the things the Brewers could have done with $16 million, this was the best mix of immediate enjoyment and future advantage. It’s as if they kept Carter, but magically gave him a better chance at making enough contact to be a star.
I know that’s not going to excite the fans who got used to the 41-homer player from last year, and I know it’s not going to excite my editor, but I love these kinds of moves. Low risk, high reward, and with something to watch next year. Good work staying interesting, Brewers.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- Turk Nowitzki
- RealGM
- Posts: 32,659
- And1: 9,944
- Joined: Feb 26, 2010
- Location: on the Hellmouth
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
ReasonablySober wrote:The Brewers cut the league leader in home runs to sign a failed prospect, and I love it
Chris Carter out, Eric Thames in. This is catnip for baseball nerds, and it just might work.If there’s a practical comparison to make, it’s not with any of the players listed above. No, the best comparison for what the Brewers might be hoping for is with Rich Hill, who was signed by the A’s for $5 million after four impressive September starts the year before. They gambled their limited money and were rewarded with premium prospects on the other side.
That’s what the Brewers want to do, but the contract is just long enough to give them a chance at using Thames for their own postseason hunt, should the stars align, and we all know that every team is potentially two or three years away from contending, regardless of how messed up they are. It’s a high-risk investment, but a team that’s trying to compete with the Cubs and Cardinals shouldn’t waste their time with municipal bonds, at least not entirely.
Of all the things the Brewers could have done with $16 million, this was the best mix of immediate enjoyment and future advantage. It’s as if they kept Carter, but magically gave him a better chance at making enough contact to be a star.
I know that’s not going to excite the fans who got used to the 41-homer player from last year, and I know it’s not going to excite my editor, but I love these kinds of moves. Low risk, high reward, and with something to watch next year. Good work staying interesting, Brewers.
Was just reading this, really good article. It answered my question from earlier too.
To put it another way, here’s the old list of players who were waived/released/cut/non-tendered/DFA’d after leading their league in home runs:
1.
And here’s the new list:
1. Chris Carter
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- trwi7
- RealGM
- Posts: 110,887
- And1: 26,402
- Joined: Jul 12, 2006
- Location: Aussie bias
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
This contract is ridiculous.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."
I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 98,734
- And1: 35,085
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
Only if you think he's gonna be below replacement, which the Brewers presumably believe he won't be.
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
- wichmae
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,726
- And1: 1,031
- Joined: Feb 22, 2005
- Location: Milwaukee
Re: Offseason 2016/17 Thread (Brewers sign 1B/OF Eric Thames 3yrs/$16mil, DFA Carter)
Mets just paid a ton for Cespedes. Gotta believe that bodes well for any Braun trade. He outperformed him and would be acheaper over the contract life.