When the smoke clears...

[fondybrewfan]

I have to imagine Narveson's spot is up for grabs; especially if another team likes Narvy enough to give us a SS. I highly doubt any of the Top #4 get traded; but if I had to pick one I would say Wolf just because he would be a good Sell High candidate after the strong year and strong posteason start

[Invader3K]

Putting 2 & 2 together...

 

Given the organization's preference for hard-throwers, if Fiers ends up in the rotation, I'd think he's more likely to take the spot of someone who doesn't throw as hard. In other words, Greinke or Yo are far less likely to be traded than any of the other 3 guys.

It would take a blockbuster return to pry away either of them.

[Bikeage77]

AJAY. You nailed it. When I first put my initial post down, I was in the midst of crying in my beer, typing with anger and not much regard for error. Just flat out angst. Everything you said I agree with. Well said.

[Roderick]

$35.7M for starting pitching (all the same)

It's going to cost them more like $38 million for the same 5 starters that they paid roughly $33 million to this year. They really need to get the total for starting pitching back down to $30 million. Marcum figures to get a $3 million raise and

$38 million? I get less.

 

Grienke $13.5

Wolf $9.5

Marcum $6.8 (arby guess)

Gallardo $5.5

Narveson $.5

 

When I said all the same, I meant the same players - not the same cost.

[RightFieldCoder]

What's your overall review of the season? Right now I'm irrate at how this last week shook out. I don't think it'll change the fact that our defense was laughable and possibly the best starting rotation Milwaukee has ever had fell apart. I currently think it was our series to lose, and we did just that. We never got to the St Louis bullpen how I thought we would, and Marcum was all and all just horrible. Even on short rest, I would've rather seenYo go game 6 and Greinke/bullpen game 7. If we're gonna get beat, get beat by the best. Marcum hasn't had it in awhile now.

 

My opinions might change in a day or two, butI haven't been this heartbroken through sports, ever.

After having some days off, I went back to thinking about this. I am still upset about how the season ended. But not as upset as I was. Here are some thoughts causing me to calm down.

Braves fans are notorious for not supporting their team because they didn't win many World Series despite being a dominating team for a decade and a half. We should learn from this and appreciate the great season the Brewers had.

If someone had told you after the '02 season that the Brewers would lose the NLCS 2-4 to the Cardinals within 10 years, would you have said, "Wow, what a horrible season that must be"?

 

[monty57]

We had possibly the best season in Brewers history with 96 wins. We won our first playoff series in 29 years, and nearly made the World Series. We have most of our team returning, along with the GM who put it all together and an owner who has shown he will do everything in his power to put the best team possible on the field. We're losing a great player at 1B, but should be able to upgrade at SS & 3B. I'm looking forward to seeing Melvin's plan unfold this offseason and fully expect a playoff-caliber team to take the field for the Brewers next year. After next year, we should get a $20MM or so annual bump from a new TV deal.

 

It sucks to lose to the Cardinals, but after the smoke clears, I'm pretty happy with the season and optimistic about the future.

[chuckiehacks]

After next year, we should get a $20MM or so annual bump from a new TV deal.

 

People keep throwing around $20MM and $30MM from this new TV deal. Has this been confirmed anywhere? I know that it was reported that they have a new deal, but I don't remember hearing any hard numbers.

[logan82]

If it does bring in $20m we will probably lose some of the shared money.

[joepepsi]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

[monty57]

Good point Logan. Chuckie, there was an article linked a while back which said something like "the current TV deal was the worst in the majors at only $10MM per year. The new deal will triple that." Not exact words, but that's the gist of it as I remember it.

 

If the article was correct (the Brewers are a privately held company, so their records are not public), I wouldn't expect the payroll to jump $20MM, but Attanasio has poured a lot of the team's revenues into payroll, so I would expect to see a significant jump, which could put us into the same payroll range as the Cardinals.

[endaround]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

On what exactly? If you had three years remaining, sure. But he's off the books in 2013. The Brewers really shouldn't have salary issues next year with the money for Fielder, Yuni and Hawkins already coming off. And its not like $9m on a one year deal will really add much to teh Brewers who really don't have that many holes to fill (given 1B is a big hole but not one where $9m in 2012 will make a difference).

[logan82]

Our payroll obligations, not including anybody on arby, over the next few years.

 

2012 - $58m(Greinke, Wolf, Hart, Braun, Weeks, Gallardo, Betancourt buyout)

2013 - $40m(Hart, Braun, Weeks, Gallardo, Wolf buyout)

2014 - $34.5m(Braun, Weeks, Gallardo)

2015 - $12m(Braun, not including Weeks option)

2016 - $19m(Braun)

[MNBrew]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

People have been saying this since he got to Milwaukee, but he pitched very, very well in 2010 AFTER his lousy May & first part of June (remember that his 12-run outing was taking one for the team b/c the bullpen was so shot) AND his 2011 was pretty darn solid, too.

 

I'm not saying there's no way he regresses, but I believe it's hardly a given.

 

I'd be less surprised if they traded Narveson, who's younger, cheaper, and not quite as good. That way spots 1-4 in the rotation are hugely experienced/successful starters and the #5 spot can be filled by Fiers/Peralta/Estrada -- in other words, someone younger & cheaper than Narveson.

[kramnoj]

I'd be less surprised if they traded Narveson, who's younger, cheaper, and not quite as good. That way spots 1-4 in the rotation are hugely experienced/successful starters and the #5 spot can be filled by Fiers/Peralta/Estrada -- in other words, someone younger & cheaper than Narveson.

 

Narveson isn't eligible for arbitration yet, so if a rookie will be cheaper, it would be relatively little difference - $30k or so.

 

It's rare for a team to only have 6 starters in a season. If some team gives up a lot to get Narveson, it would be worth exploring, but he shouldn't be a target to be moved. Fiers, Peralta, etc can still use development time in the minors and would be options if needed during the season.

[MNBrew]

Okay, so Fiers/Peralta are not much cheaper than Narveson, but are they perhaps a higher-ceiling guys than him?

 

I knew Narveson was appreciably over 2 years of service time, but I hadn't realized how relatively far from 3 he still was (I suppose 2 years, 102 days won't earn him Super-2 status).

[kramnoj]

Certainly they are higher ceiling. But if you are concerned about cost, then there is incentive to keep them in the minors to start the season. If they don't start the season, but come up a few weeks into the season, you can get 6 years and 5 months or so of service time. If you bring them up 2 or 3 months into the season, you can avoid Super 2 status, which can save up to millions of dollars, depending on the player.

[The Truth]

Narveson certainly has trade value as he's been a fairly solid starter and would be under team control through his arby years. The Brewers need to be 100% sure about Marcum before they trade any pitchers though. I'm a bit scarred (and scared) by the 2009 & 2010 Brewers and what happens without great pitching. You get a couple injuries and all of sudden you are relying on AAAA guys in important games. Ugh. Scary.

 

Sure they have Gallardo & Greinke & Wolf. But if Marcum is an unknown quantity (I'm hoping he just slumped at the end), no way do you deal Narveson

[TooLiveBrew]

Fiers/Peralta are not much cheaper than Narveson, but are they perhaps higher-ceiling guys than him?

Peralta yes, Fiers no (imo). I'm really looking forward to Peralta's arrival, and the Brewers are in the perfect situation -- they could risk trading Marcum or Wolf for a position player upgrade & just slot Peralta into the MLB rotation... or they could just keep the depth & look to free agency to make any positional upgrades.

 

I think Fiers can be a good MLB pitcher, but maybe not as a starter.

[JohnBriggs12]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

Exactly. They'll be paying in around $38 million to their top 4 starters next year including $16 million to their 3 and 4 starters. That's up about $5 million over 2011. That's too much allocated to starting pitching when they have needs elsewhere (bullpen, SS). Gosh if you're going to do that, trade all 3 of Greinke, Marcum, and Wolf, saving around $30 million, and sign Sabathia. Frankly, I'd like their chances better with a Gallardo, Sabathia, Narveson, Peralta, (fill in the blank from one of the deals) rotation myself.

[joepepsi]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

On what exactly? If you had three years remaining, sure. But he's off the books in 2013. The Brewers really shouldn't have salary issues next year with the money for Fielder, Yuni and Hawkins already coming off. And its not like $9m on a one year deal will really add much to teh Brewers who really don't have that many holes to fill (given 1B is a big hole but not one where $9m in 2012 will make a difference).

A lot of the comments posted previous to mine revolved around next year's budget and that with raises the payroll in 2012 will be about the same, so there isn't much flexibility. My point is, if you think the Brewers need to enter the free agent market to replace Prince or get an upgrade at SS or 3B, then trading Wolf is quickest, most efficient way to payroll flexibility.

 

I don't necessarily agree with that but unless Mark A intends to substantially increase the payroll from 2011, then trading Wolf makes some sense. I think the team will be just fine with Gamel at 1B, Green at 3rd and some kind of upgrade at SS to start the year. Then at the deadline in July they can look to expand payroll if they are in the hunt.

 

I don't see much value in trade for Narveson. He's basically a LH Dave

Bush and is of more use on the team than in a trade that wouldn't bring

much more than a low level prospet in return.

[rluzinski]

Trading Wolf will free up some real money. He'll probably regress a bit next and is in his final year. I'm not sure there is a big difference between and average Randy Wolf season at age 35 and Chris Narveson. Wolf next + 2013 option is $11 million. He's done a fine job for the Brewers but it seems that money can be better spent next year.

People have been saying this since he got to Milwaukee, but he pitched very, very well in 2010 AFTER his lousy May & first part of June (remember that his 12-run outing was taking one for the team b/c the bullpen was so shot) AND his 2011 was pretty darn solid, too.

 

I'm not saying there's no way he regresses, but I believe it's hardly a given.

Wolf had a 3.69 ERA last year. He won't project to have an ERA below 4 so yes, he will be expected to regress.

[monty57]

If we don't really think we'll be a playoff team next year, then we should trade any of Wolf, Marcum and Grienke who we cannot extend so that we can get something better than draft picks from them.

 

If we do think we'll be a playoff contender next year, then you only trade Wolf, Marcum or Grienke if you think the return you get in trade plus a FA you could get with the cost savings plus whatever rookie we start in their place will make us better than we would be without the trade. The Brewers have only been in the playoffs three times in their existance. When it looks like we could realistically compete for the playoffs, we can't make moves which will likely make us worse in the short-term. Peralta and Fiers make great AAA insurance next year, and should get plenty of starts as some of our starters suffer injuries. Even if Peralta/Fiers were able to match Wolf/Marcum/Greinke in 2012 (which doesn't seem likely), trading Wolf/Marcum/Greinke would hurt our team by eliminating our AAA depth.

 

Now, if there is some trade we could make which would be such an upgrade that they would be worth the probable downgrade from Greinke/Marcum/Wolf to Peralta/Fiers, then you make the trade. That trade could be out there, and if it is, I hope we make it. However, I don't want to see us trade one of our starters for a AA guy with potential when the cost would be a significant downgrade in our chances at the playoffs in 2012. When we're in "rebuild mode," then I'm happy with those trades, but not when we've got a team with a good shot at the playoffs.

 

Finally, I don't care what the pitchers are making, as long as it fits in the overall budget. Some years, we will pay more for pitchers when we have low-priced talent at other positions. Some years we will pay more for position players when we have low-priced talent in the rotation. In the not-too-distant future, we should have a steady stream of young MLB ready pitchers, at a time when we will be paying a lot of money for guys like Braun and Weeks. That's just the way things cycle, so we can't set limits such as "we can only spend x on starting pitching, y on position players and z on the bullpen."

 

Our starting pitching upgrades last offseason were the main reason we made the NLCS this year. We can have that whole group back again, so it would take a very good offer to make me break them up.

[RockCoCougars]

One issue that I do have with Wolf -depending on the projected payroll for '11- revolves around the question of whether it's really worthwhile to spend $10 million on a 4th starter? Especially considering the many positions of need and payroll limitations. I do understand that the team was extremely lucky with starter health last season and such, and I'm not suggesting that Wolf is a salary dump type guy, but perhaps you could get something of value for him while giving the team more payroll flexibility. I guess I'd rather skimp on a 4th starter than 2-3 spots in the starting lineup/bullpen.

[endaround]

A #4 starter makes as many starts as a #1 starter.

[JohnBriggs12]

If we don't really think we'll be a playoff team next year, then we should trade any of Wolf, Marcum and Grienke who we cannot extend so that we can get something better than draft picks from them.

 

If we do think we'll be a playoff contender next year, then you only trade Wolf, Marcum or Grienke if you think the return you get in trade plus a FA you could get with the cost savings plus whatever rookie we start in their place will make us better than we would be without the trade. The Brewers have only been in the playoffs three times in their existance. When it looks like we could realistically compete for the playoffs, we can't make moves which will likely make us worse in the short-term. Peralta and Fiers make great AAA insurance next year, and should get plenty of starts as some of our starters suffer injuries. Even if Peralta/Fiers were able to match Wolf/Marcum/Greinke in 2012 (which doesn't seem likely), trading Wolf/Marcum/Greinke would hurt our team by eliminating our AAA depth.

 

Now, if there is some trade we could make which would be such an upgrade that they would be worth the probable downgrade from Greinke/Marcum/Wolf to Peralta/Fiers, then you make the trade. That trade could be out there, and if it is, I hope we make it. However, I don't want to see us trade one of our starters for a AA guy with potential when the cost would be a significant downgrade in our chances at the playoffs in 2012. When we're in "rebuild mode," then I'm happy with those trades, but not when we've got a team with a good shot at the playoffs.

 

Finally, I don't care what the pitchers are making, as long as it fits in the overall budget. Some years, we will pay more for pitchers when we have low-priced talent at other positions. Some years we will pay more for position players when we have low-priced talent in the rotation. In the not-too-distant future, we should have a steady stream of young MLB ready pitchers, at a time when we will be paying a lot of money for guys like Braun and Weeks. That's just the way things cycle, so we can't set limits such as "we can only spend x on starting pitching, y on position players and z on the bullpen."

 

Our starting pitching upgrades last offseason were the main reason we made the NLCS this year. We can have that whole group back again, so it would take a very good offer to make me break them up.

The starting pitching upgrades played a part but just as significant were the bullpen upgrades (having Axford a full season, plus the services of Saito and K-Rod in the 2nd half and a healthy Hawkins) Braun and Fielder went from 57 HR and 186 RBI in 2010 to 71 and 231 in 2011. That was just as important too, especially given the fall off of McGehee.

 

There's no way this team without a bona fide MVP candidate in Fielder and lock down late inning reliever like K-Rod is a contender. It might be if Greinke were the guy he was in 2009, but there was no sign of that guy in the postseason or through much of the regular season for that matter.

 

It should matter what the pitchers are making just as it matters what everyone makes. The more of a budget taken by one part of the team, the less is available elsewhere. Marcum was a good value at the roughly $4 million he made last year. He won't be as much a value at the near $7 million he's projected to make in 2012 especially if the playoff version shows up.. Is the Greinke we saw last year really a $13.5 million dollar pitcher? He was only if it made the difference between playoff and no playoffs. He wasn't on performance alone. As for Wolf, when he was signed, by default, he was the number 2 starter. Now he's a 4, maybe a 3.

 

Look, all 3 of these guys will be talked about extensively as the trade deadline approaches if the team isn't in contention which is certainly a realistic possibility. Exploring deals now is doing your due diligence.