2018 Brewers Discussion - Yelich Signing on Page 45

mlloyd10 · Post #341 » by **mlloyd10** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:18 am

Brewers showing interest in Carlos Santana

Gianstoppable · Post #342 » by **Gianstoppable** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:46 am

Turk Nowitzki wrote:
Gianstoppable wrote:Surprised by how many people wouldnt make a move for Archer, He's going to cost a ton of course but we have a lot to give, and I am sorry but if a possible top 5 pitcher is on the market at a reasonable price you take that. Odds are these prospects dont pan out, dont get caught with your pants down. Brewers already have their whole rotation controllable and cheap, why not add a cheap ace?? You can always trade a guy from the rotation and get good value back.

Go crazy and get Archer and you still have plenty of space to add another top pitcher and bullpen pieces

All of the bolded parts are some pretty uh.........let's call them a fun collection of assumptions.

1. Not that crazy, he has the stuff-but yes could have worded better.
2. His contract is an absolute steak , no way around that.
3. Fact, the odds are against the prospects being more productive than Archer currently is but, I can understand that one. We've all seen trades that can go either way however.
4. Everyone in our rotation has value on the trade market, that's not an assumption. Controllable, mostly young and good pitchers.
5. We would certainly have the cap space after adding Archer to add another top pitcher and bullpen guy, don't see what the assumption is there.

Turk Nowitzki · Post #343 » by **Turk Nowitzki** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:31 am

Not saying the Rays would necessarily go for it or that I'd be in favor, but if you had to choose, would it be more palatable to construct an Archer trade around Domingo Santana as the centerpiece (pair him with maybe one or two other guys in the second/third tier prospect level) versus dealing several guys in the upper tier of the top 10 (Brinson, Burnes, Ortiz etc. etc.)?

Kerb Hohl · Post #344 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:16 am

Gianstoppable wrote:3. Fact, the odds are against the prospects being more productive than Archer currently is but, I can understand that one. We've all seen trades that can go either way however.

If you keep enough prospects in your system, the hit rate on a larger number of prospects is more in your favor. Maybe Tampa steals 4 uninspiring ones, or maybe they steal 2 cornerstone players. Of course we don’t know but I don’t want to thin out our farm system and pray that all 3 of our only good remaining ones pan out 2-3 years from now.

There is also a negative side to Archer. As twirly noted, he gives up a lot of hard contact which could be trouble at Miller Park. Also, dude throws a ton of sliders. I worry about his arm over the life of that contract.

Again, I don’t think I’d actually prefer this really happening, but there’s almost just as much value in knowingly overpaying Arrieta, Cobb, or Lynn (only on short contracts) and making up the value down the road with the extra prospects being very good players and earning $500k.

WeekapaugGroove · Post #345 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:36 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:
Gianstoppable wrote:
Again, I don’t think I’d actually prefer this really happening, but there’s almost just as much value in knowingly overpaying Arrieta, Cobb, or Lynn (only on short contracts) and making up the value down the road with the extra prospects being very good players and earning $500k.

Yeah I won't kill them if they sign someone. Heck it almost wouldn't feel right if they didn't have some 30 something pitcher that I grow to hate over the life of their contract; they have had someone like that for like a decade now. As long as the contract is short I get using this avenue as a bridge until guys like Ortiz, Burnes, and Peralta are ready to contribute.

Now with that said I would also understand if they choose to do some type of deal moving a couple of prospects. They have a deep system and they could be looking at a bit of a crunch on the 40 man roster for the rule 5 draft and simply opportunity over the next couple years. At some point guys need to either move up or out of the system so if they have a log jam at a position group then making a minor win now move to balance that out is acceptable.

JimmyTheKid · Post #346 » by **JimmyTheKid** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:43 pm

mlloyd10 wrote:Brewers showing interest in Carlos Santana

1) Why?

2) Link?

coolhandluke121 · Post #347 » by **coolhandluke121** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:51 pm

If Santana is the best value relative to production, great. Cut Aguilar and trade Thames. Free up a roster spot for another reliever.

Wish he still played catcher. You could cut Vogt and Aguilar and keep Thames.

Just tinker and take what the market gives you.

Kerb Hohl · Post #348 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:02 pm

coolhandluke121 wrote:If Santana is the best value relative to production, great. Cut Aguilar and trade Thames. Free up a roster spot for another reliever.

Wish he still played catcher. You could cut Vogt and Aguilar and keep Thames.

Just tinker and take what the market gives you.

I wouldn't "cut" Thames. He's got value. Maybe you were just being quick with that one, of course.

coolhandluke121 · Post #349 » by **coolhandluke121** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:16 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:
coolhandluke121 wrote:If Santana is the best value relative to production, great. Cut Aguilar and trade Thames. Free up a roster spot for another reliever.

Wish he still played catcher. You could cut Vogt and Aguilar and keep Thames.

Just tinker and take what the market gives you.

I wouldn't "cut" Thames. He's got value. Maybe you were just being quick with that one, of course.

I said cut Aguilar and trade Thames. No way I'd just cut Thames, and I'd keep him if they couldn't find value in a trade. But cutting Aguilar and signing Santana would at least open up the door to some more possibilities. Santana is also a legit backup to Shaw against lhp's. If the market is lukewarm on him, I'd be thrilled if the Brewers get him on a bargain deal.

Kerb Hohl · Post #350 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:23 pm

I can't read.

wichmae · Post #351 » by **wichmae** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:29 pm

Aguilar would have value enough to someone that we wouldnt need to "cut" him. I also dont see really any way Santana fits into our current structure. It would be a really puzzling move to say the least.

On the Archer front you have to look at his contact % and hard % percent. When he gets hit he gets hit hard. Players who show this at where he is at now age wise generally dont improve as they get older. It tends to get way worse. Add in the Miller Park and NL central factor (granted he does pitch in NY and BOS who are hitter friendly) and I just dont know if Im willing to give up the ask for him. If the Mets truly are listening on their guys or if the Pirates make Cole available I explore that instead. Gausman is a nice trade bounceback candidate as well.

coolhandluke121 · Post #352 » by **coolhandluke121** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:32 pm

wichmae wrote:Aguilar would have value enough to someone that we wouldnt need to "cut" him.

I'd bet against them getting anything of consequence but yeah, they wouldn't have to "cut" him. I don't think very many people other than some Brewer fans actually think he's an MLB player though.

Kerb Hohl · Post #353 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:34 pm

I just don't want to trade for any young-ish pitchers with a lot of team control. That sounds silly, but I still am not ready to say, "OK, this is our window. Let's win in these next 3 years." I just let this play out and sign free agents. Maybe I'm wrong in the fact that I will end up waiting too long, but I still don't think it's time to try to jump the Cubs.

If we're up by 7 games in early July, then I trade a haul for a #2 starter or an ace. I just think there's a chance that we empty our farm system for Archer or Cole before this season even starts and we're sitting here in July of 2019 hoping for a Wild Card after missing the playoffs in 2018 and asking if we should trade the remaining few guys in our system to get it.

As much as every "I'm an enlightened fan and know how small market teams should be run" fan would come to Miller Park with pitchforks if the Brewers signed Arrieta or Lynn, you still can walk into 2020 or 2021 with an influx of new talent that Stearns has in the system. Not much elite talent, but a quantity of good talent. If we trade for Archer or Cole, we're talking about turning our entire roster over in 2020/2021 and not having a ton of prospects ready to carry the team.

wichmae · Post #354 » by **wichmae** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:36 pm

coolhandluke121 wrote:
wichmae wrote:Aguilar would have value enough to someone that we wouldnt need to "cut" him.

I'd bet against them getting anything of consequence but yeah, they wouldn't have to "cut" him. I don't think very many people other than some Brewer fans actually think he's an MLB player though.

IM going to use Jason Rogers as an example of people valuing good pinch hitters. Brandon Moss as well. Theres always going to be a market for a player who can come off the bench OPS over 800, take walks, hit for power, and especially for an AL team. I could easily see KC being interested once Hosmer leaves on a pre arb player who can do all those things.

WeekapaugGroove · Post #355 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:43 pm

Oh yeah they would get something for Aguilar. Hell in the juiced ball era a strong guy like him will run into enough home runs to make him useful.

Kerb Hohl · Post #356 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:44 pm

I'm not sure how valuable Aguilar is. Bad defender that plays on the wrong side of the platoon. If I want a DH, I'd rather have a full-time lefty and rotate in a RH bat that's already in the field.

wichmae · Post #357 » by **wichmae** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:08 pm

If Michael Fulmer is truly available I would give just about anything to get him. Not sure how accurate the report is.

wichmae · Post #358 » by **wichmae** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:13 pm

Read on Twitter

No way...

WeekapaugGroove · Post #359 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:21 pm

wichmae wrote:

Read on Twitter

No way...

Oh yeah no way I they should even consider offering 4 years. The only way I see Walker back is if he completely strikes out in FA and would be willing to take a nice 1 year deal with the intention of trying FA again next winter.

Kerb Hohl · Post #360 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:30 pm

I'd take Walker at 2, MAYBE 3 years if we don't spend big on a pitcher but I don't think it'll happen.

If we trade for Archer, Fulmer, Cole, etc. then the Brewers may be locked into signing guys like Walker for 3 or 4 years. You've outright stated that your window is 2018-2021 or 2022. I'm not cutting any corners and I'm willing to pay long/bloated contracts to try to win. Not worth your time to see if Villar can work it out. You need to hit the ground running.